0
   

THE US, THE UN AND IRAQ, TENTH THREAD.

 
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Oct, 2006 06:39 pm
Ican, I have a thread entitled 'questions Republicans just can't answer.'

I will tell you honestly that you are the bravest and most praiseworthy Republican on this site when it comes to actually attempting to answer tough questions about the War on Terror and the situation in Iraq.

I would ask you to please come and show us your answers to the questions.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Oct, 2006 06:43 pm
Yes, give them something to ridicule and pick apart line by line because no matter what answer you give, they will not agree with it and will continue arguing on-and-on about what you have written. Waste your time giving them something to do...

Seriously though, ignore that thread because if they don't know the answers, nothing you write will matter to them.
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Oct, 2006 06:48 pm
Cycloptichorn wrote:
Ican, I have a thread entitled 'questions Republicans just can't answer.'

I will tell you honestly that you are the bravest and most praiseworthy Republican on this site when it comes to actually attempting to answer tough questions about the War on Terror and the situation in Iraq.

I would ask you to please come and show us your answers to the questions.

Cycloptichorn

I'll take a look!


.... brave, praiseworthy Exclamation Question Shocked
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Oct, 2006 06:56 pm
ican, Bush is the one that broke it, and he's got no solution. Quit trying to blame the democrats for problems created by Bush.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Oct, 2006 07:06 pm
ican711nm wrote:
Cycloptichorn wrote:
Ican, I have a thread entitled 'questions Republicans just can't answer.'

I will tell you honestly that you are the bravest and most praiseworthy Republican on this site when it comes to actually attempting to answer tough questions about the War on Terror and the situation in Iraq.

I would ask you to please come and show us your answers to the questions.

Cycloptichorn

I'll take a look!


.... brave, praiseworthy Exclamation Question Shocked


Yes, brave and praiseworthy.

You may not have noticed, but you are the only Republican left who even attempts to make arguments as to how we should move forward in Iraq. That's praiseworthy. Your compatriots have all abandoned you on this thread, but you soldier on. Brave.

Just because I don't agree with you doesn't mean I don't recognize your worth.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Oct, 2006 07:09 pm
McGentrix wrote:
Yes, give them something to ridicule and pick apart line by line because no matter what answer you give, they will not agree with it and will continue arguing on-and-on about what you have written. Waste your time giving them something to do...

Seriously though, ignore that thread because if they don't know the answers, nothing you write will matter to them.


McGentrix,

You don't know an answer to any of those questions. You don't have the slightest clue. So drop your superiority act, it's pathetic.

Dems already have enough to argue about and accuse Republicans of, because you have made a gigantic f*cking mess of our country. I'm tired of the attitude by those who did the screwing up that they somehow know things that others don't, so you can't trust them. You're empty. Hollow. Full of crap and unable to answer practical questions about the future plans that your leaders don't have. You are unable to support positions held by your leaders.

I say that anyone who doesn't have the gumption to do so is a coward.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Oct, 2006 07:21 pm
Right on, Cyclo. Cowards and idiots; none have served in our armed services, and they have the balls to talk about "patriotism."
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Oct, 2006 08:02 pm
cicerone imposter wrote:
ican, Bush is the one that broke it, and he's got no solution. Quit trying to blame the democrats for problems created by Bush.

Show me where I'm wrong to think that I don't blame Democrats for the problems created by Bush. I blame Bush for those problems I think Bush created.

I blame the Democrats for failing to adequately recognize the problems created by the terrorists, and to propose defensible solutions of their own for solving these terrorist problems. Also, I blame the Democrats for their seemingly endless stream of vitriol spouted against the character of the Republicans, instead of rational critiques of Republican tactics and proposals of rational alternatives to those tactics.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Oct, 2006 08:16 pm
Embarrassed hahah

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Oct, 2006 09:25 pm
ican, Do YOU know how many "real" advisors Bush ignored - and even dismissed? You really think Bush will listen to an independent on the issue of Iraq? Where do you live?
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Oct, 2006 09:26 pm
Have you ever heard of Rove, Cheney and Rummy? Maybe, even Condi. Bush also "listens' to god.
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Oct, 2006 10:20 pm
cicerone imposter wrote:
ican, Do YOU know how many "real" advisors Bush ignored - and even dismissed? You really think Bush will listen to an independent on the issue of Iraq? Where do you live?

I live in reality!

For me Bush's behavior is a minor issue. What to do about terrorism is a major issue. So whether Bush soves the problem of terrorism or someone else does is not interesting to me. What is interesting to me is how to best solve the problem of terrorism. When I am convinced I know the answer, then I will begin looking for a candidate or candidates, who also know that answer.

First things first, how in the hell can we best solve the terrorist problem?
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Oct, 2006 10:51 pm
ican, You must be blind; everything Bush has done only exacerbated the terrorist problem. It's increasing so fast, I'm not sure there is a way to solve this problem. When a patient keeps getting sicker and sicker, but the patient refuses to listen to all the experts, any possibility to solve the problem is practically impossible, and the patient will eventually die.

That's the situation we're in. We had many opportunities to limit this single problem, but Bush refused to listen. His mantra was "stay the course."

You're now asking how we can solve this problem, when Bush will be at the helm for two more years. When you have a leader that doesn't listen to expert advise, this is what we end up with.

Everybody wants an answer, but Bush is not the one to get the job done. He's the problem.
0 Replies
 
revel
 
  1  
Reply Thu 2 Nov, 2006 08:04 am
I don't see how we have any choice but to wait this bloody power struggle out and see who is left standing in the end.

We have stepped up a campaignto establish order yet despite this sincere effort, it just keeps getting worse with more daily killings and kidnappings. Not only that but the government in Iraq is all but at a halt as Parliament was delayed for the second day because too few members showed up.

You have to be registered to link to this LA article which confirms my statements above.

However, if the violence does indeed get much worse (I have trouble imagining how much worse it can get) then we will look like we abandoned a sinking ship full of people trying to get to safety. It is kind of a dilemma political wise, but in reality I don't think our presence or lack of presence is going to affect the situation in Iraq too much.

At this point I don't think there is anything we can do make the nightmarish situation better as I haven't heard anything from the things I have read. The most we can hope for is a partial containment of the violence and even that is a long shot from what I have been reading.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 2 Nov, 2006 10:33 am
revel wrote: However, if the violence does indeed get much worse (I have trouble imagining how much worse it can get) then we will look like we abandoned a sinking ship full of people trying to get to safety. It is kind of a dilemma political wise, but in reality I don't think our presence or lack of presence is going to affect the situation in Iraq too much.


Just maybe, your's is a false premise. Do we really know we'll be abandoning a sinking ship, or will our departure improve situations in Iraq?

By the latest polls, over 80 percent of Iraqis want us out. Their PM will not listen to the US in how they fight the terrorism activity in Iraq. Is our soldier's blood worth all the mayhem and more bloodshed?

We can't fight this battle alone; we've already alienated most of our allies. If we "abandon" Iraq, the responsiblity will fall back to where it belongs: the world community. It's a world-wide responsibility; not a US responsibility to control terrorism around the world.
0 Replies
 
Gelisgesti
 
  1  
Reply Thu 2 Nov, 2006 10:34 am
ican711nm wrote:
cicerone imposter wrote:
ican, Do YOU know how many "real" advisors Bush ignored - and even dismissed? You really think Bush will listen to an independent on the issue of Iraq? Where do you live?

I live in reality!

For me Bush's behavior is a minor issue. What to do about terrorism is a major issue. So whether Bush soves the problem of terrorism or someone else does is not interesting to me. What is interesting to me is how to best solve the problem of terrorism. When I am convinced I know the answer, then I will begin looking for a candidate or candidates, who also know that answer.

First things first, how in the hell can we best solve the terrorist problem?


You forget the prime directive ... pre-emptive strike .... if they look or act like terrorist waste their arse ..... if they look like they are thinking in a suspicious manner we can't afford to be weak ... don't forget the mushroom cloud or the rape rooms!! Is that dark skinned pizza delivery
boy really a delivery boy or is he a terrorist operative?
Keep up the good work fearless leader.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 2 Nov, 2006 10:35 am
Our soldiers are trying to control a civil war, and that's not our responsibility. Iraq's history tells us that!
0 Replies
 
revel
 
  1  
Reply Thu 2 Nov, 2006 11:41 am
cicerone imposter wrote:
revel wrote: However, if the violence does indeed get much worse (I have trouble imagining how much worse it can get) then we will look like we abandoned a sinking ship full of people trying to get to safety. It is kind of a dilemma political wise, but in reality I don't think our presence or lack of presence is going to affect the situation in Iraq too much.


Just maybe, your's is a false premise. Do we really know we'll be abandoning a sinking ship, or will our departure improve situations in Iraq?

By the latest polls, over 80 percent of Iraqis want us out. Their PM will not listen to the US in how they fight the terrorism activity in Iraq. Is our soldier's blood worth all the mayhem and more bloodshed?

We can't fight this battle alone; we've already alienated most of our allies. If we "abandon" Iraq, the responsiblity will fall back to where it belongs: the world community. It's a world-wide responsibility; not a US responsibility to control terrorism around the world.


Right now most of the violence doesn't even seem to be connected to us, but between the ethnic groups, if we leave, that violence will still be there. However, your right our leaving will appease the insurgents who object to our presence in Iraq and to the 80% of the Iraq population who want us out.
0 Replies
 
hamburger
 
  1  
Reply Thu 2 Nov, 2006 08:56 pm
i think it might be worthwhile to look back and see what history tells us about the civil/religious war now coming to a boil in iraq .
here is a map of the middle-east showing the various religous groups .

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/41380000/gif/_41380588_mid_east_shias2_map416.gif

the various religious groups in iraq:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/spl/hi/pop_ups/04/middle_east_enl_1078337479/img/laun.jpg
(there is also a map in the BBC article showing the geographical distribution of the groups)


while it may be difficult for us to understand , the disagreements between sunnis and shias go back over a thousand years . i think it can be compared to the "thirty year war" that swept through germany and caused death and devastion , and even after a peace agreement was signed still went on in various forms for about another twohundred years .
(see later in my post)


from the linked article :
"Sunnis and Shias differ in doctrine, ritual, law, theology and religious organisation. It is the largest and oldest division in the history of Islam.

But the origins of the split lie in a dispute over who should have succeeded the Prophet Muhammad as leader of the Muslim community when he died in 632.

One group of Muslims elected Abu Bakr as the next caliph (leader) of the community, but another group believed the prophet's son-in-law, Ali, was the rightful successor.


Shias re-enact the battle near Karbala in which Hussein was killed
Though Ali eventually became the fourth caliph, his legitimacy was disputed and he was murdered in 661.

The Shiat Ali ("Party of Ali") refused to recognise the legitimacy of his chief opponent and successor, Muawiya.

Ali's sons Hassan and Hussein continued to oppose Muawiya and his successor, Yazid, and fighting between the two sides resulted. Hassan was poisoned in 669 and Hussein was killed in battle near Karbala in 680.


Click here for a map of Shia communities in the Mid-East
Ali, Hassan and Hussein became the first of the 12 imams who Shia Muslims believe are the divinely-appointed leaders of the Muslim community.

The leadership by imams continued until 878, when the 12th Imam, Mohammed al-Mahdi, is said to have disappeared from a cave below a mosque in Samarra.

Not accepting that he died, Shias still await his return more than 1,100 years later. The Hidden Imam's arrival will, they believe, reverse their fortunes and herald the reign of divine justice.

Sunnis, as they became known, reject the principle of leadership by imams, and instead believe in the primacy of the Sunna - what the Prophet Muhammad said, did, agreed to or condemned.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
...IRAQ AND THE BATTLE OF SUNNIS AND SHIAS...
(link to the full article from the BBC)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
imo it will be difficult to reconcile these religious differences easily .
looking at the map of the middle-east , it seems that iraq is the country with the greatest split between sunnis and shias . iran is predominantly shia and the other countries mostly sunnis .
when iraq was 'cobbled' together little thought was given to the religious differences between these two groups .
and make no mistake about it : they are MAJOR differences not easily resolved .
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
coming back to my earlier remarks about the "thirty year war" , i believe it also started out as a religious war betwenn catholic forces and protestant forces . it grew from there to become a more widespread war .

imo that is what is happening in iraq .
after the invasion of iraq a kind of religious war started (the shias wanted to get even after having been suppressed for many years ) . it now seems that many other groups (tribes , mercenaries , plain bandits , you name it) have turned it into a free-for-all .
how it can be resolved is anyones guess imo .

(listening to secretary rumsfeld over the last few days , what i keep hearing is : "it's very complicated" . and indeed it is , but that was clear before the first american soldier ever set foot into iraq . it should not have come as a surprise to anyone having read about islam and the middle-east)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
link to 'thirty year war' :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thirty_Years'_War
(you have to paste the FULL link in , can't get URL to work - sorry)

from the linked article :
"The Thirty Years' War was fought between 1618 and 1648, principally on the territory of today's Germany, and involved most of the major European continental powers. Although it was from the outset a religious conflict between Protestants and Catholics, the rivalry between the Habsburg dynasty and other powers was also a central motive, as shown by the fact that Catholic France even supported the Protestant side, increasing France-Habsburg rivalry.

The impact of the Thirty Years' War and related episodes of famine and disease was devastating. The war may have lasted for 30 years, but conflicts continued for 300 more years. "
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
sorry if my post is somewhat disjointed .
it's getting late and i'm getting tired , but did not want to lose what i had cobbled together .
perhaps will expand on it over the weekend .
hbg
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 2 Nov, 2006 09:36 pm
The best news I've seen in a very long time. Bush's approval rating isnow below 30 percent. HURRAH!

From the BBC:
The survey suggests only 29% of Americans approve of the way Mr Bush is handling the war, matching his lowest rating in a May-June poll.


Nearly 70% said the president did not have a plan to end the war, and 80% said his latest effort to rally public support added up to a change in language, not policy.

Three-quarters of those polled expect the Democrats to reduce or end US military involvement in Iraq if they win control of Congress.

Half of independent voters said they intended to vote for Democrats, compared with 23% who said they would vote for Republicans. Both parties are seeking to win over the undecided members of the electorate.
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
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 01/18/2025 at 09:26:13