THE US, THE UN AND IRAQ, TENTH THREAD.

Cycloptichorn wrote:

...
Second, I understand your reasoning behind the correctness of invading Iraq; but the point you are missing is that when the leadership of the nation prosecuting the war has shown themselves to be

A. Liars
B. Ineffectual
C. Unwilling to change course in the face of evidence

Then you have a serious problem. It calls into question their ability to solve the problems that they created. It calls into question their ability to successfully prosecute AQ and the war on Terror. It calls their judgement, their morality, and their ethics into question.

It is the opinion of many that without proper leadership, we cannot prevail against the terrorist threat. I know that you believe that we can kill our way out of being threatened by terror, but that is somewhat juvenille; at some point we are going to have to have an understanding between cultures, with sacrifices on both ends, in order to achieve a lasting peace. Bush, through a combination of his willingness to decieve and his inability to effectively lead, is completely unable of securing such a peace. This is why we harp over and over on the subject.

Cycloptichorn

I agree: "when the leadership of the nation prosecuting the war has shown themselves to be ... Ineffectual ... Unwilling to change course in the face of evidence ... Then you have a serious problem. It calls into question their ability to solve the problems that they created ... without proper leadership, we cannot prevail against the terrorist threat."

So where shall we find the proper leadership?

I think it need come from us -- from all of us.

It's long past time we all realize we must help this administration we have to accomplish what is in all our interests to accomplish.

Unrelenting criticism of what we are doing won't help anybody or anything. We must start to have unrelenting advocacy of policies, strategies, and tactics that appear to us individually or collectively to be most probable to succeed.

Otherwise, our collective opportunity to replace current leadership with better leadership will eventually disappear.

Foxfyre wrote:

... the alternative and better way is for the anti-victory forces to change their mind, get behind the President and military, and give them a green light and Good Housekeeping stamp of approval to do whatever is necessary to win this war. They will no longer be required to pull their punches or be second guessed and criticized for whatever property or collateral damage is done and they (and the terrorists) will be reminded daily that the American people are 100% behind them and cheering them on to victory. If our allies followed suit, it would expedite victory and peace that much sooner.

Had we done that in the first place, I honestly believe this thing would have essentially been over within the first year, many thousands of lives would have been spared, and the only troops we would have there now would be advisory as Iraq finishes training a new army and policy force and putting their Constitution into effect. If that was our normal M.O. from the beginning, I think we would have gone in with overwhelming force as we did in Desert Storm and we would have gotten the job done.

By 'we" I mean the entire coalition. I think most of us are way more timid and reticient than we used to be, and that as much as anything is empowering the world's terrorists to step up their efforts to conquer us all. I think the reason Israel did not achieve complete victory is that world opinion didn't want it to. And that is unfortunate as it prevents true peace from being attained.

Otherwise, our collective opportunity to replace current leadership with better leadership will eventually disappear.

... the alternative and better way is for the anti-victory forces to change their mind, get behind the President and military, and give them a green light and Good Housekeeping stamp of approval to do whatever is necessary to win this war

...

ican711nm wrote:

...
Yes, "the Al Qaeda camp in NE Iraq was in Kurd terrority," and Yes, "Saddam Hussein was not allowed to enter that terrority" ... in aircraft, that is. It was a no-fly zone for Saddam not a no-go zone. Remember, we three times asked Saddam to extradite the leadership of that "Al Qaeda camp in NE Iraq." Clearly, by virtue of our requests he was given permission to go into NE Iraq. He ignored all three of our requests including the one made publicly by Powell, February 5, 2003, before the UN.

... Powell never made that request before the UN.

Yes, Powell did make that request before the UN in his speech 2/5/2003.

Secretary of State, Colin Powell in his speech to the UN, 2/5/2003 -- a month and a half before our invasion of Iraq -- alleged the "sinister nexus" and that we had twice requested extradition of al-Qaeda leadership from Iraq. This public disclosure before the UN was itself tantamount to making a third request.

While Saddam's regime refuted Powell's allegations about Iraq's possession of WMD and Iraq's abetting 9/11, Saddam's regime ignored Powell's allegation about the "sinister nexus" and the US's requests for extradition of the al-Qaeda's leadership in Iraq.

Quote:

http://www.state.gov/secretary/former/powell/remarks/2003/17300.htm

But what I want to bring to your attention today is the potentially much more sinister nexus between Iraq and the al-Qaida terrorist network, a nexus that combines classic terrorist organizations and modern methods of murder. Iraq today harbors a deadly terrorist network headed by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi an associate and collaborator of Usama bin Laden and his al-Qaida lieutenants.

Zarqawi, Palestinian born in Jordan, fought in the Afghan war more than a decade ago. Returning to Afghanistan in 2000, he oversaw a terrorist training camp. One of his specialties, and one of the specialties of this camp, is poisons.

When our coalition ousted the Taliban, the Zarqawi network helped establish another poison and explosive training center camp, and this camp is located in northeastern Iraq. You see a picture of this camp.

The network is teaching its operatives how to produce ricin and other poisons. Let me remind you how ricin works. Less than a pinch -- imagine a pinch of salt -- less than a pinch of ricin, eating just this amount in your food, would cause shock, followed by circulatory failure. Death comes within 72 hours and there is no antidote. There is no cure. It is fatal.

Those helping to run this camp are Zarqawi lieutenants operating in northern Kurdish areas outside Saddam Hussein's controlled Iraq. But Baghdad has an agent in the most senior levels of the radical organization Ansar al-Islam that controls this corner of Iraq. In 2000, this agent offered al-Qaida safe haven in the region.

After we swept al-Qaida from Afghanistan, some of those members accepted this safe haven. They remain there today.

Zarqawi's activities are not confined to this small corner of northeast Iraq. He traveled to Baghdad in May of 2002 for medical treatment, staying in the capital of Iraq for two months while he recuperated to fight another day.

During his stay, nearly two dozen extremists converged on Baghdad and established a base of operations there. These al-Qaida affiliates based in Baghdad now coordinate the movement of people, money and supplies into and throughout Iraq for his network, and they have now been operating freely in the capital for more than eight months.

Iraqi officials deny accusations of ties with al-Qaida. These denials are simply not credible. Last year, an al-Qaida associate bragged that the situation in Iraq was "good," that Baghdad could be transited quickly.

We know these affiliates are connected to Zarqawi because they remain, even today, in regular contact with his direct subordinates, include the poison cell plotters. And they are involved in moving more than money and materiel. Last year, two suspected al-Qaida operatives were arrested crossing from Iraq into Saudi Arabia. They were linked to associates of the Baghdad cell and one of them received training in Afghanistan on how to use cyanide.

From his terrorist network in Iraq, Zarqawi can direct his network in the Middle East and beyond. We in the United States, all of us, the State Department and the Agency for International Development, we all lost a dear friend with the cold-blooded murder of Mr. Laurence Foley in Amman, Jordan, last October. A despicable act was committed that day, the assassination of an individual whose sole mission was to assist the people of Jordan. The captured assassin says his cell received money and weapons from Zarqawi for that murder. After the attack, an associate of the assassin left Jordan to go to Iraq to obtain weapons and explosives for further operations. Iraqi officials protest that they are not aware of the whereabouts of Zarqawi or of any of his associates. Again, these protests are not credible. We know of Zarqawi's activities in Baghdad. I described them earlier.

Now let me add one other fact. We asked a friendly security service to approach Baghdad about extraditing Zarqawi and providing information about him and his close associates. This service contacted Iraqi officials twice and we passed details that should have made it easy to find Zarqawi. The network remains in Baghdad. Zarqawi still remains at large, to come and go.

British Leave Iraqi Base; Militia Supporters Jubilant
Some Troops Will Reposition to Border With Iran

By Amit R. Paley
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, August 25, 2006; A14

BAGHDAD, Aug. 24 -- British troops abandoned a major base in southern Iraq on Thursday and prepared to wage guerrilla warfare along the Iranian border to combat weapons smuggling, a move that anti-American cleric Moqtada al-Sadr called the first expulsion of U.S.-led coalition forces from an Iraqi urban center.

"This is the first Iraqi city that has kicked out the occupier!" trumpeted a message from Sadr's office that played on car-mounted speakers in Amarah, capital of the southern province of Maysan. "We have to celebrate this occasion!"

Maj. Charlie Burbridge, a British military spokesman, said the last of 1,200 troops left Camp Abu Naji, just outside Amarah, at noon Thursday, after several days of heavy mortar and rocket fire by a local militia, which local residents identified as the Sadr-controlled Mahdi Army. Adopting tactics used by a British special forces unit in North Africa during World War II, 600 of the soldiers plan to slip soon into the marshlands and deserts of eastern Maysan in an attempt to secure the Iranian border.

The repositioning is the first public acknowledgment that forces from the U.S.-led military coalition in Iraq have entered into guerrilla warfare to combat the insurgents and militias they have been fighting for more than three years.

The move also underscores both the rising power of Sadr's Shiite Muslim militia, which has clashed with American forces in an attempt to drive them out of the country, and burgeoning alarm over Shiite-ruled Iran's perceived role in exacerbating the sectarian violence roiling Iraq. U.S. officials have accused Iran of supplying bombs and other weapons to Shiite militias here.

The withdrawal sparked wide-scale looting at the base and then intense clashes late Thursday between Iraqi army forces guarding the camp and unknown attackers, a military intelligence official said. The volatile situation worsened when the 2nd Battalion of the Iraqi army's 4th Brigade mutinied and attacked a local military outpost, said the official, who spoke on condition that his name not be used.

The British soldiers, members of the Queen's Royal Hussars, are preparing to trade their heavy Challenger 2 tanks and Warrior fighting vehicles for lightweight Land Rovers, Burbridge said. They expect to become a flexible, mobile force with no fixed base and receive supplies by airdrops.

"The Americans believe there is an inflow of IEDs and weapons across the border with Iran," said Burbridge, referring to improvised explosive devices, in a telephone interview from Basra. "Our first objective is to go and find out if that is the case. If that is true, we'll be able to disrupt the flow." He said the second goal was to train Iraqi border guards.

Burbridge acknowledged that constant shelling of the base in Amarah by militia forces, including 17 mortar rounds fired in recent days that wounded three people, were part of the reason the camp closed.

"By no longer presenting a static target, we reduce the ability of the militias to strike us," he said. But he rejected Sadr's claim that the British had been defeated and pushed out of Amarah. "It's very difficult to claim a victory without causing significant casualties."

The mood was quite different in Amarah, where jubilant residents flocked to Sadr's office to offer their congratulations. Drivers in the street honked their car horns in celebration. Some prepared to take to the streets to rejoice.

"Today is a holiday in our province," said Abu Mustaffa, an unemployed 45-year-old from the city's al-Hussein district. "Thanks be to God!"

Abu Mustaffa said anger toward the British reached fever pitch in recent days after soldiers entered a mosque and arrested several local men. The provincial government is controlled by Sadr's movement, he said.

Elsewhere in Iraq, bombings and shootings killed at least 14 Iraqis and two U.S. soldiers Thursday, the Associated Press reported.

In Baghdad, the top U.S. commander in the Middle East said a new security plan was helping to curb violence in the capital. "I believe there is a danger of civil war in Iraq, but only a danger. I think Iraq's far from it," Gen. John P. Abizaid told the AP. "I think that there's been great progress in the security front here recently in Baghdad."

Special correspondents K.I. Ibrahim, Naseer Nouri, Saad al-Izzi and other Washington Post staff members contributed to this report.

...

Quote:

Otherwise, our collective opportunity to replace current leadership with better leadership will eventually disappear.

Why is this? Our system is under no threat of disruption whatsoever. Terrorism does not have the ability to destroy America or our system of governance, as you well know. We will not lose our ability to replace current leadership any time soon.

We disagree. I cannot prove to you my crystal ball is better than your crystal ball any more than you can prove the reverse to me. I do believe the Islamo-terrorists have the ability to destroy America or our system of governance.

I, and many others, don't trust liars. Can't stand them. The Bush admin has shown themselves to be unworthy of getting behind, unworthy of trust. Honestly, if Bush told the truth more often, I would be more behind him when it comes to his decisions. As he doesn't, I'm not; and I hardly expect others to be.

You think Bush is a liar. I don't. I think he believes everything he says is true whether it is actually true or not.

Perhaps, rather than assuming that half the country is crazy/siding with the enemy for not supporting Bush and his policies, for not getting behind the war effort, you should examine why those who are leading the charge have been so supremely ineffectual in marshalling public support. Contrast this to the unity found in the war in Afghanistan conflict and see if you can figure out why the public was so for one and so against the other.

I think I know "why those who are leading the charge have been so supremely ineffectual in marshalling public support." They are fallible people trying to educate the public about a kind of danger that transcends confrontations of nations and instead constitutes a confrontation between belief systems and cultures. Generally, the public cannot yet comprehend how deadly and effective a few thousand well-trained and well-armed suicidal murderers in a belief system and cultural confrontation can be in frightening people into subservience rather than into a confrontation wherein they must exterminate these murderers before they murder more.

Rather than waste time and energy complaining about the limitations of our elected officials, we better start helping them defend us rather than hindering them. I believe that if we keep up that hinderance long enough, we or our posterity shall end up in an Islamo-Big-Brother totalitarian world.
...
Cycloptichorn

They are fallible people trying to educate the public about a kind of danger that transcends confrontations of nations and instead constitutes a confrontation between belief systems and cultures.

Rather than waste time and energy complaining about the limitations of our elected officials, we better start helping them defend us rather than hindering them. I believe that if we keep up that hinderance long enough, we or our posterity shall end up in an Islamo-Big-Brother totalitarian world.

We disagree. I cannot prove to you my crystal ball is better than your crystal ball any more than you can prove the reverse to me. I do believe the Islamo-terrorists have the ability to destroy America or our system of governance.

Quote:

They are fallible people trying to educate the public about a kind of danger that transcends confrontations of nations and instead constitutes a confrontation between belief systems and cultures.

So, you believe that the best way to deal with a danger that transcends confrontations between nations... is to confront nations who refuse to do what we say?

If you truly believe that what we face is a confrontation between cultures and belief systems, you would agree that the best method for ending this confrontation is to work towards a reconciliation between the belief systems. Instead you advocate killing, which only makes martyrs out of those who were formerly seen as dangerous extremists by their own society. By responding with force instead of diplomacy, by using the heavy hand instead of the light hand, we have shifted the Muslim culture further to the extreme; those who fight against America are seen as heroes, even though they kill other Muslims in the process, even though they use force against non-combatants.

You also discount the huge economic and governmental component of this struggle. OBL specifically complains about the actions of the US many times in his communiques, and yet no thought is given to whether or not he has a point at all, or more importantly, whether or not other Muslims believe that he has a point! Unless you advocate genocide and the destruction of a large group of humanity, you must come to terms with our enemies on some level, and that is going to mean some sort of concession or change on our part; it is inevitable, and moreso, a surer route to victory than the juvenille belief that we can simply bomb our way through our problems.

Quote:

Rather than waste time and energy complaining about the limitations of our elected officials, we better start helping them defend us rather than hindering them. I believe that if we keep up that hinderance long enough, we or our posterity shall end up in an Islamo-Big-Brother totalitarian world.

As others have pointed out, you throw around the term 'big brother' incorrectly. The Islaamic world is nothing like that proposed in 1984, and neither are they totalitarian conquerors.

I'll backtrack a bit:

Quote:

We disagree. I cannot prove to you my crystal ball is better than your crystal ball any more than you can prove the reverse to me. I do believe the Islamo-terrorists have the ability to destroy America or our system of governance.

Based upon what evdience, do you believe this? What would the terrorists do to destroy America? What actions would they take? How would they defeat us? Why would Americans give up? You never educate us on the specifics of your fear for the survival of America, so please do so. Are they going to nuke us into submission? Bomb us into cowardice and fear? Are they going to release bioweapons to kill us all?

Are they going to scare us into abandoning our rights and way of life? That is the only way they could possibly affect America significantly. And unfortunately, that seems to be the route that our leaders - who you quite kindly call 'fallible,' yeah, no sh*t on that one - are pursuing at the moment: telling us that the terrorists hate our freedom, and then taking away that freedom. I'm surprised that you don't call the Admin a bunch of appeasers.

Cycloptichorn

· Violence and Sadrists drive away archaeologist
· Looting fear as funds run out to pay protection force


Iraq's most prominent archaeologist has resigned and fled the country, saying the dire security situation, an acute shortage of funds, and the interference of supporters of the radical Shia cleric Moqtada al-Sadr had made his position intolerable

Quote:

They are fallible people trying to educate the public about a kind of danger that transcends confrontations of nations and instead constitutes a confrontation between belief systems and cultures.

So, you believe that the best way to deal with a danger that transcends confrontations between nations... is to confront nations who refuse to do what we say?

If you truly believe that what we face is a confrontation between cultures and belief systems, you would agree that the best method for ending this confrontation is to work towards a reconciliation between the belief systems. Instead you advocate killing, which only makes martyrs out of those who were formerly seen as dangerous extremists by their own society. By responding with force instead of diplomacy, by using the heavy hand instead of the light hand, we have shifted the Muslim culture further to the extreme; those who fight against America are seen as heroes, even though they kill other Muslims in the process, even though they use force against non-combatants.

You also discount the huge economic and governmental component of this struggle. OBL specifically complains about the actions of the US many times in his communiques, and yet no thought is given to whether or not he has a point at all, or more importantly, whether or not other Muslims believe that he has a point! Unless you advocate genocide and the destruction of a large group of humanity, you must come to terms with our enemies on some level, and that is going to mean some sort of concession or change on our part; it is inevitable, and moreso, a surer route to victory than the juvenille belief that we can simply bomb our way through our problems.

Quote:

Rather than waste time and energy complaining about the limitations of our elected officials, we better start helping them defend us rather than hindering them. I believe that if we keep up that hinderance long enough, we or our posterity shall end up in an Islamo-Big-Brother totalitarian world.

As others have pointed out, you throw around the term 'big brother' incorrectly. The Islaamic world is nothing like that proposed in 1984, and neither are they totalitarian conquerors.

I'll backtrack a bit:

Quote:

We disagree. I cannot prove to you my crystal ball is better than your crystal ball any more than you can prove the reverse to me. I do believe the Islamo-terrorists have the ability to destroy America or our system of governance.

Based upon what evdience, do you believe this? What would the terrorists do to destroy America? What actions would they take? How would they defeat us? Why would Americans give up? You never educate us on the specifics of your fear for the survival of America, so please do so. Are they going to nuke us into submission? Bomb us into cowardice and fear? Are they going to release bioweapons to kill us all?

Are they going to scare us into abandoning our rights and way of life? That is the only way they could possibly affect America significantly. And unfortunately, that seems to be the route that our leaders - who you quite kindly call 'fallible,' yeah, no sh*t on that one - are pursuing at the moment: telling us that the terrorists hate our freedom, and then taking away that freedom. I'm surprised that you don't call the Admin a bunch of appeasers.

Cycloptichorn

Now let me add one other fact. We asked a friendly security service to approach Baghdad about extraditing Zarqawi and providing information about him and his close associates. This service contacted Iraqi officials twice and we passed details that should have made it easy to find Zarqawi. The network remains in Baghdad. Zarqawi still remains at large, to come and go.

BAGHDAD -- The scene at Camp Abu Naji was one of devastation Friday, witnesses said, as pillagers, some hoisting photos of anti-American cleric Moqtada Sadr, roamed the base that once was home to Britain's proud Scots Dragoon Guards, and, more recently, the Queen's Royal Hussars.

"Everything that could be carried was taken," said an Iraqi army major in nearby Amara who asked not to be named because of the delicate security situation in the city of 300,000, some 230 miles southeast of Baghdad. Items taken included furniture, generators, wooden doors, corrugated iron roofs and just about anything else that could be resold, the major said.

The base had been home to some 1,200 British troops who patrolled southeastern Iraq. Their plan had been to turn the camp over to Iraqi authorities, but several Iraq officials said that the sudden withdrawal Thursday took them by surprise. Iraqi forces didn't have enough time to secure the facility before the looters swooped in, Iraqi officials said.

Confronted by Iraqi troops, the Iraqi major said, some looters continued to ransack the base, taunting the security men by saying, "Shoot me!"

They then burned what remained of the facility, which had been an Iraqi army camp before the British moved in after the fall of Saddam Hussein in April 2003.

There was no immediate word on casualties.

Cmdr. Jane Allen, a British military spokeswoman in Baghdad, attributed the pillaging to poor residents seeking items for resale and not to political motivations.

"The prospect of gaining access to equipment ... is likely to have been too much to resist," her statement said.

But followers of Sadr were declaring Friday that the looting represented a victory over the "occupier."

In a statement earlier this month, the camp commander, Lt. Col. David Labouchere, had said the British move would be completed "by mid-September."

It was unclear Friday why the British had apparently advanced their departure date, but supporters of Sadr, whose militia forces have frequently clashed with the British, said the British had been chased out.

The camp had suffered numerous mortar strikes in recent days, attacks widely believed linked to Sadr's militia, the Mahdi Army. Sadr's allies are a powerful political force in Amara, long a strategic gateway to neighboring Iran, and other parts of southern Iraq, where most residents also are Shiites.

Wild celebrations broke out among Sadr supporters as word of the British pullout became known.

"The Sadr movement rejects the occupation and its presence," said Sheik Aba Dar, a Sadr advocate in Amara.

British authorities have described the pullout as having two aims: turning over regional security to British-trained Iraqi forces and repositioning troops to counter the weapons-smuggling threat from Iran. British border patrols once based at the camp will spread to the deserts and marshes of Maysan province, of which Amara is the capital, authorities said.

U.S. officials have expressed increasing concern in recent months that anti-U.S. Shiite militias have been receiving arms and bombmaking material from Iran, a Shiite-dominated nation that has close links to the main Shiite political parties in power in Iraq. Shiite militias have been prime suspects in the epidemic of death-squad killings that have been ravaging Iraq.

For this consequence alone, ...

For this consequence alone, the key figures in this administration ought to be put in public stocks, have their expensive trousers pulled down around their ankles, so that every achaeologist, historian and citizen can whack their bare fat asses in front of the world's tv cameras.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,,1858843,00.html

ican711nm wrote:

They are fallible people trying to educate the public about a kind of danger that transcends confrontations of nations and instead constitutes a confrontation between belief systems and cultures.

So, you believe that the best way to deal with a danger that transcends confrontations between nations... is to confront nations who refuse to do what we say?

No! I believe that we should confront nations that allow sanctuary to those who adhere to murderous belief systems & cultures that have declared war on us, that have made war on us, that are making war on us, and are repeatedly declaring their intention to establish a totalitarian regime over us as well as the rest of humanity.

If you truly believe that what we face is a confrontation between cultures and belief systems, you would agree that the best method for ending this confrontation is to work towards a reconciliation between the belief systems.

No! I believe that the worst method for ending our confrontation with murderous belief systems & cultures "is to work towards a reconciliation" with these murderous belief systems & cultures. Reconciliation between our democratic belief systems & cultures and these murderous belief systems & cultures is too improbable. Any attempt by us to negotiate with them will lead them to believe that use of force and murder against us, or even the threat of the use of force and murder against us, will get them whatever they want each and every such negotiation.

I believe that the best method for ending our confrontation with murderous belief systems & cultures is to work towards completely defeating these murderous belief systems & cultures. I believe that is not only a possible way to end these confrontations, it is a probable way to end these confrontations.


Instead you advocate killing, which only makes martyrs out of those who were formerly seen as dangerous extremists by their own society. By responding with force instead of diplomacy, by using the heavy hand instead of the light hand, we have shifted the Muslim culture further to the extreme; those who fight against America are seen as heroes, even though they kill other Muslims in the process, even though they use force against non-combatants.

I think your analysis is really based on a vain hope, a naive expectation, a fantasy, a childish illusion, a psychic escape from reality. These murderous belief systems & cultures ridicule our efforts to reconcile our belief systems & cultures with theirs, and interpret our efforts of that kind as evidence to them of our weaknesses that will allow them to exterminate us. The shift, such as has occurred, of the Muslim society to murderous belief systems & cultures, occurred because many were convinced by what they perceive as our weakness that to save themselves from their likely expected deadly fate if they didn't shift, they must shift in order to survive.

You also discount the huge economic and governmental component of this struggle. OBL specifically complains about the actions of the US many times in his communiques, and yet no thought is given to whether or not he has a point at all, or more importantly, whether or not other Muslims believe that he has a point!

OBL has repeatedly claimed that he objects to what he calls "our occupation of his holy places." But we removed our troops from his holy places some time ago. He also complained of Israel's presence in Palestine. But removal of Israel from Palestine is non-negotiable. If we don't remove Israel he will attempt to continue his war. If we were so cruel as to remove Israel, OBL will be encouraged to make additional demands.

Unless you advocate genocide and the destruction of a large group of humanity, you must come to terms with our enemies on some level, and that is going to mean some sort of concession or change on our part; it is inevitable, and moreso, a surer route to victory than the juvenille belief that we can simply bomb our way through our problems.

I think by announcing our intention to completely defeat these murderous belief systems & cultures and then proceding to do just that, we will soon discover that many current members of murderous belief systems & cultures will leave those murderous belief systems & cultures. More importantly, fewer people--not more people--will subsequently join these murderous belief systems & cultures.

ican711nm wrote:

Rather than waste time and energy complaining about the limitations of our elected officials, we better start helping them defend us rather than hindering them. I believe that if we keep up that hinderance long enough, we or our posterity shall end up in an Islamo-Big-Brother totalitarian world.

As others have pointed out, you throw around the term 'big brother' incorrectly. The Islaamic world is nothing like that proposed in 1984, and neither are they totalitarian conquerors.

I do not "throw around the term 'big brother' incorrectly." Of course murderous belief systems & cultures have not yet evolved to the totalitarian level of Big Brother, but that is exactly where they have declared they want to evolve, only they call it something different. They call it a Worldwide Caliphat. What it is they want to evolve, is far more important than what they call what they want to evolve.

The members of murderous belief systems & cultures already practice the extermination of their own kind that do not completely adhere to their beliefs. The members of murderous belief systems & cultures already practice the extermination of others that do not completely adhere to their beliefs. They do this with the modern technology they already understand and know how to employ; it is the adequate modern technology they will need to maintain "Big Brother" control once they achieve it.

I'll backtrack a bit:

ican711nm wrote:

We disagree. I cannot prove to you my crystal ball is better than your crystal ball any more than you can prove the reverse to me. I do believe the Islamo-terrorists have the ability to destroy America or our system of governance.

Based upon what evdience, do you believe this? What would the terrorists do to destroy America? What actions would they take? How would they defeat us? Why would Americans give up? You never educate us on the specifics of your fear for the survival of America, so please do so. Are they going to nuke us into submission? Bomb us into cowardice and fear? Are they going to release bioweapons to kill us all? Are they going to scare us into abandoning our rights and way of life?

That is the only way they could possibly affect America significantly.

While they may resort to nukes or bio-weapons, I think they can accomplish what they want to accomplish with the conventional kinds of ordnance they are using in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Lebanon. They can accomplish this in the following six stages:
Stage 1 is purchase right here in the USA free market place the ingredients and materials they need to build their ordnance;
Stage 2 store those ingredients and materials wherever they can throughout the USA;
Stage 3 assemble and produce the ordnance they need wherever they can throughout the USA;
Stage 4. store the ordnance whereever they can throughout the USA;
Stage 5 distribute the ordnance wherever they can throughout the USA;
Stage 6 use that ordnance throughout the USA to murder large gatherings of the public, to destroy our infrastructure, and to chemically (not bio-chemically) pollute to high toxic levels the air and water in highly populated areas of the USA.

Failure to completely defeat these murderous belief systems & cultures before they are in Stage 6, will probably lead to our demise, because after Stage 6 is underway we will no longer be able to completely defeat these murderous belief systems & cultures.

I expect Stage 6 will occur within 20 years, if we continue our highly constrained mostly reactionary rather than pro-actionary methods in the middle east and elsewhere.

And unfortunately, that seems to be the route that our leaders - who you quite kindly call 'fallible,' yeah, no sh*t on that one - are pursuing at the moment: telling us that the terrorists hate our freedom, and then taking away that freedom. I'm surprised that you don't call the Admin a bunch of appeasers.

During WWII almost all families temporarily gave up some of their freedoms, in order to rescue all of their freedoms subsequently.

There's our choice:

Negotiate away our freedoms over time in the false hope we can that way postpone or negotiate away confrontations;

or,

Give up some of our freedoms for a short time to enable us to completely defeat the murderous belief systems & cultures, and thereby rescue and retain all of our freedoms.
Cycloptichorn

Ican ... ?

Cycloptichorn wrote:

ican711nm wrote:

They are fallible people trying to educate the public about a kind of danger that transcends confrontations of nations and instead constitutes a confrontation between belief systems and cultures.

So, you believe that the best way to deal with a danger that transcends confrontations between nations... is to confront nations who refuse to do what we say?

No! I believe that we should confront nations that allow sanctuary to those who adhere to murderous belief systems & cultures that have declared war on us, that have made war on us, that are making war on us, and are repeatedly declaring their intention to establish a totalitarian regime over us as well as the rest of humanity.

If you truly believe that what we face is a confrontation between cultures and belief systems, you would agree that the best method for ending this confrontation is to work towards a reconciliation between the belief systems.

No! I believe that the worst method for ending our confrontation with murderous belief systems & cultures "is to work towards a reconciliation" with these murderous belief systems & cultures. Reconciliation between our democratic belief systems & cultures and these murderous belief systems & cultures is too improbable. Any attempt by us to negotiate with them will lead them to believe that use of force and murder against us, or even the threat of the use of force and murder against us, will get them whatever they want each and every such negotiation.

I believe that the best method for ending our confrontation with murderous belief systems & cultures is to work towards completely defeating these murderous belief systems & cultures. I believe that is not only a possible way to end these confrontations, it is a probable way to end these confrontations.


Instead you advocate killing, which only makes martyrs out of those who were formerly seen as dangerous extremists by their own society. By responding with force instead of diplomacy, by using the heavy hand instead of the light hand, we have shifted the Muslim culture further to the extreme; those who fight against America are seen as heroes, even though they kill other Muslims in the process, even though they use force against non-combatants.

I think your analysis is really based on a vain hope, a naive expectation, a fantasy, a childish illusion, a psychic escape from reality. These murderous belief systems & cultures ridicule our efforts to reconcile our belief systems & cultures with theirs, and interpret our efforts of that kind as evidence to them of our weaknesses that will allow them to exterminate us. The shift, such as has occurred, of the Muslim society to murderous belief systems & cultures, occurred because many were convinced by what they perceive as our weakness that to save themselves from their likely expected deadly fate if they didn't shift, they must shift in order to survive.

You also discount the huge economic and governmental component of this struggle. OBL specifically complains about the actions of the US many times in his communiques, and yet no thought is given to whether or not he has a point at all, or more importantly, whether or not other Muslims believe that he has a point!

OBL has repeatedly claimed that he objects to what he calls "our occupation of his holy places." But we removed our troops from his holy places some time ago. He also complained of Israel's presence in Palestine. But removal of Israel from Palestine is non-negotiable. If we don't remove Israel he will attempt to continue his war. If we were so cruel as to remove Israel, OBL will be encouraged to make additional demands.

Unless you advocate genocide and the destruction of a large group of humanity, you must come to terms with our enemies on some level, and that is going to mean some sort of concession or change on our part; it is inevitable, and moreso, a surer route to victory than the juvenille belief that we can simply bomb our way through our problems.

I think by announcing our intention to completely defeat these murderous belief systems & cultures and then proceding to do just that, we will soon discover that many current members of murderous belief systems & cultures will leave those murderous belief systems & cultures. More importantly, fewer people--not more people--will subsequently join these murderous belief systems & cultures.

ican711nm wrote:

Rather than waste time and energy complaining about the limitations of our elected officials, we better start helping them defend us rather than hindering them. I believe that if we keep up that hinderance long enough, we or our posterity shall end up in an Islamo-Big-Brother totalitarian world.

As others have pointed out, you throw around the term 'big brother' incorrectly. The Islaamic world is nothing like that proposed in 1984, and neither are they totalitarian conquerors.

I do not "throw around the term 'big brother' incorrectly." Of course murderous belief systems & cultures have not yet evolved to the totalitarian level of Big Brother, but that is exactly where they have declared they want to evolve, only they call it something different. They call it a Worldwide Caliphat. What it is they want to evolve, is far more important than what they call what they want to evolve.

The members of murderous belief systems & cultures already practice the extermination of their own kind that do not completely adhere to their beliefs. The members of murderous belief systems & cultures already practice the extermination of others that do not completely adhere to their beliefs. They do this with the modern technology they already understand and know how to employ; it is the adequate modern technology they will need to maintain "Big Brother" control once they achieve it.

I'll backtrack a bit:

ican711nm wrote:

We disagree. I cannot prove to you my crystal ball is better than your crystal ball any more than you can prove the reverse to me. I do believe the Islamo-terrorists have the ability to destroy America or our system of governance.

Based upon what evdience, do you believe this? What would the terrorists do to destroy America? What actions would they take? How would they defeat us? Why would Americans give up? You never educate us on the specifics of your fear for the survival of America, so please do so. Are they going to nuke us into submission? Bomb us into cowardice and fear? Are they going to release bioweapons to kill us all? Are they going to scare us into abandoning our rights and way of life?

That is the only way they could possibly affect America significantly.

While they may resort to nukes or bio-weapons, I think they can accomplish what they want to accomplish with the conventional kinds of ordnance they are using in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Lebanon. They can accomplish this in the following six stages:
Stage 1 is purchase right here in the USA free market place the ingredients and materials they need to build their ordnance;
Stage 2 store those ingredients and materials wherever they can throughout the USA;
Stage 3 assemble and produce the ordnance they need wherever they can throughout the USA;
Stage 4. store the ordnance whereever they can throughout the USA;
Stage 5 distribute the ordnance wherever they can throughout the USA;
Stage 6 use that ordnance throughout the USA to murder large gatherings of the public, to destroy our infrastructure, and to chemically (not bio-chemically) pollute to high toxic levels the air and water in highly populated areas of the USA.

Failure to completely defeat these murderous belief systems & cultures before they are in Stage 6, will probably lead to our demise, because after Stage 6 is underway we will no longer be able to completely defeat these murderous belief systems & cultures.

I expect Stage 6 will occur within 20 years, if we continue our highly constrained mostly reactionary rather than pro-actionary methods in the middle east and elsewhere.

And unfortunately, that seems to be the route that our leaders - who you quite kindly call 'fallible,' yeah, no sh*t on that one - are pursuing at the moment: telling us that the terrorists hate our freedom, and then taking away that freedom. I'm surprised that you don't call the Admin a bunch of appeasers.

During WWII almost all families temporarily gave up some of their freedoms, in order to rescue all of their freedoms subsequently.

There's our choice:

Negotiate away our freedoms over time in the false hope we can that way postpone or negotiate away confrontations;

or,

Give up some of our freedoms for a short time to enable us to completely defeat the murderous belief systems & cultures, and thereby rescue and retain all of our freedoms.
Cycloptichorn

OK CYCLO!

NOW ITS YOUR TURN TO EXPLAIN WHY YOU BELIEVE WHAT YOU BELIEVE.

So, you believe that the best way to deal with a danger that transcends confrontations between nations... is to confront nations who refuse to do what we say?

No! I believe that we should confront nations that allow sanctuary to those who adhere to murderous belief systems & cultures that have declared war on us, that have made war on us, that are making war on us, and are repeatedly declaring their intention to establish a totalitarian regime over us as well as the rest of humanity.

If you truly believe that what we face is a confrontation between cultures and belief systems, you would agree that the best method for ending this confrontation is to work towards a reconciliation between the belief systems.

No! I believe that the worst method for ending our confrontation with murderous belief systems & cultures "is to work towards a reconciliation" with these murderous belief systems & cultures. Reconciliation between our democratic belief systems & cultures and these murderous belief systems & cultures is too improbable. Any attempt by us to negotiate with them will lead them to believe that use of force and murder against us, or even the threat of the use of force and murder against us, will get them whatever they want each and every such negotiation.

I believe that the best method for ending our confrontation with murderous belief systems & cultures is to work towards completely defeating these murderous belief systems & cultures. I believe that is not only a possible way to end these confrontations, it is a probable way to end these confrontations.

Instead you advocate killing, which only makes martyrs out of those who were formerly seen as dangerous extremists by their own society. By responding with force instead of diplomacy, by using the heavy hand instead of the light hand, we have shifted the Muslim culture further to the extreme; those who fight against America are seen as heroes, even though they kill other Muslims in the process, even though they use force against non-combatants.

I think your analysis is really based on a vain hope, a naive expectation, a fantasy, a childish illusion, a psychic escape from reality. These murderous belief systems & cultures ridicule our efforts to reconcile our belief systems & cultures with theirs, and interpret our efforts of that kind as evidence to them of our weaknesses that will allow them to exterminate us. The shift, such as has occurred, of the Muslim society to murderous belief systems & cultures, occurred because many were convinced by what they perceive as our weakness that to save themselves from their likely expected deadly fate if they didn't shift, they must shift in order to survive.

As others have pointed out, you throw around the term 'big brother' incorrectly. The Islaamic world is nothing like that proposed in 1984, and neither are they totalitarian conquerors.

I do not "throw around the term 'big brother' incorrectly." Of course murderous belief systems & cultures have not yet evolved to the totalitarian level of Big Brother, but that is exactly where they have declared they want to evolve, only they call it something different. They call it a Worldwide Caliphat. What it is they want to evolve, is far more important than what they call what they want to evolve.

The members of murderous belief systems & cultures already practice the extermination of their own kind that do not completely adhere to their beliefs. The members of murderous belief systems & cultures already practice the extermination of others that do not completely adhere to their beliefs. They do this with the modern technology they already understand and know how to employ; it is the adequate modern technology they will need to maintain "Big Brother" control once they achieve it.

You also discount the huge economic and governmental component of this struggle. OBL specifically complains about the actions of the US many times in his communiques, and yet no thought is given to whether or not he has a point at all, or more importantly, whether or not other Muslims believe that he has a point!

OBL has repeatedly claimed that he objects to what he calls "our occupation of his holy places." But we removed our troops from his holy places some time ago. He also complained of Israel's presence in Palestine. But removal of Israel from Palestine is non-negotiable. If we don't remove Israel he will attempt to continue his war. If we were so cruel as to remove Israel, OBL will be encouraged to make additional demands.

I'll backtrack a bit:

ican711nm wrote:

We disagree. I cannot prove to you my crystal ball is better than your crystal ball any more than you can prove the reverse to me. I do believe the Islamo-terrorists have the ability to destroy America or our system of governance.

Based upon what evdience, do you believe this? What would the terrorists do to destroy America? What actions would they take? How would they defeat us? Why would Americans give up? You never educate us on the specifics of your fear for the survival of America, so please do so. Are they going to nuke us into submission? Bomb us into cowardice and fear? Are they going to release bioweapons to kill us all? Are they going to scare us into abandoning our rights and way of life?

That is the only way they could possibly affect America significantly.

While they may resort to nukes or bio-weapons, I think they can accomplish what they want to accomplish with the conventional kinds of ordnance they are using in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Lebanon. They can accomplish this in the following six stages:
Stage 1 is purchase right here in the USA free market place the ingredients and materials they need to build their ordnance;
Stage 2 store those ingredients and materials wherever they can throughout the USA;
Stage 3 assemble and produce the ordnance they need wherever they can throughout the USA;
Stage 4. store the ordnance whereever they can throughout the USA;
Stage 5 distribute the ordnance wherever they can throughout the USA;
Stage 6 use that ordnance throughout the USA to murder large gatherings of the public, to destroy our infrastructure, and to chemically (not bio-chemically) pollute to high toxic levels the air and water in highly populated areas of the USA.

Failure to completely defeat these murderous belief systems & cultures before they are in Stage 6, will probably lead to our demise, because after Stage 6 is underway we will no longer be able to completely defeat these murderous belief systems & cultures.

I expect Stage 6 will occur within 20 years, if we continue our highly constrained mostly reactionary rather than pro-actionary methods in the middle east and elsewhere.

We are spending $8 billion a month in Iraq. That's $2 billion each week, $267 million each day, or $11 million each hour. For what we spend in three weeks, we could make needed improvements in order to properly secure our public transportation systems. For what we spend in five days, we could put radiation detectors in all of our ports. And for two days in Iraq, we could screen all air cargo.

And unfortunately, that seems to be the route that our leaders - who you quite kindly call 'fallible,' yeah, no sh*t on that one - are pursuing at the moment: telling us that the terrorists hate our freedom, and then taking away that freedom. I'm surprised that you don't call the Admin a bunch of appeasers.

During WWII almost all families temporarily gave up some of their freedoms, in order to rescue all of their freedoms subsequently.

There's our choice:

Negotiate away our freedoms over time in the false hope we can that way postpone or negotiate away confrontations;

or,

Give up some of our freedoms for a short time to enable us to completely defeat the murderous belief systems & cultures, and thereby rescue and retain all of our freedoms.

OK CYCLO!

NOW ITS YOUR TURN TO EXPLAIN WHY YOU BELIEVE WHAT YOU BELIEVE.