0
   

THE US, THE UN AND IRAQ, TENTH THREAD.

 
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 21 Jun, 2007 11:41 am
Kara, I believe I missed it. Can you provide us with a summary?
0 Replies
 
xingu
 
  1  
Reply Thu 21 Jun, 2007 11:52 am
0 Replies
 
Kara
 
  1  
Reply Thu 21 Jun, 2007 12:10 pm
Thanks, xingu. You beat me to it.

I thought the piece was brilliant...profoundly sad but true.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 21 Jun, 2007 12:38 pm
xingu and Kara, Thank you for bringing my attention to this article. It spells out today's problems from yesterday's problems, primarily the way Israel has treated its own citizens, and the Palestinians themselves for their poor leadership and extremism that continues its own conflicts.

This paragraph from the NYTimes article is the primary problem for Israel and the Palestinians.


0 Replies
 
xingu
 
  1  
Reply Thu 21 Jun, 2007 01:20 pm
As long as we have this Israeli-Palestinian conflict going on we will have Americans being killed. We will be paying for it until it is resolved.
0 Replies
 
Kara
 
  1  
Reply Thu 21 Jun, 2007 07:40 pm
c.i., the paragraph you posted is key to the piece, a seminal statement of the core problem.

xingu, I don't see it quite that way but the end result may be the same. The tragedy of Palestine and Israel is a decades-old story, and we should continue to try to help solve it because it is our uncritical support for Israel that fuels the fires; but we did not strike the match. This is a complex issue, and each "side" has arguments in its favor and reasoned analysis behind its viewpoints. One seldom sees so perceptive a disquisition as in the NY Times piece.

Americans will continue to be killed because we try to impose our will upon the world by force.
0 Replies
 
xingu
 
  1  
Reply Thu 21 Jun, 2007 08:03 pm
Kara wrote:
Americans will continue to be killed because we try to impose our will upon the world by force.


And that comes from arrogance. Arrogance comes from our power. We are obsessed with our military. Think of what will happen to any politician who wants to cut the Defence budget and spend more to help Americans in need. The conservatives would crucify him. It seems every budget has to have an increase in military spending.

http://www.globalissues.org/i/military/country-distribution-2005.png

http://www.globalissues.org/i/military/us-spending-1998-2008.png
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 21 Jun, 2007 08:23 pm
the only problem I find with the pie chart and graph is simply that the US's continued wars in Afghanistan and Iraq will have a long future that we will be paying on irregardless of when active warfare actually ends.

Our soldiers are returning home with injuries that in many cases will require lifelong medical needs; that's not figured into the current federal budget.

It's not just a matter of Bush's funding cuts for our veterans, but the added co-pays and fees that are being tacked onto their benefits. The increasing demand by our veterans for benefits and services as they return from war will not be met by the budgets now being proposed by Bush.

Bush would rather VETO stem cell research rather than helping our returning veterans; cells are more important.
0 Replies
 
Kara
 
  1  
Reply Thu 21 Jun, 2007 08:33 pm
c.i., his veto of stem cells has nothing to do with his possible insensitivity and probable ignorance of veteran's problems. He is a political animal, swept by the tides of his voting base. His stem cell veto is in line with his conservative base (although I think Bush is more of a Republican than a conservative.) He is perhaps not cognizant, or paying attention to, the burgeoning problems of the returning wounded service people.

xingu, we have always backed up our ideology with our military might. We are not the more powerful nation on earth because of our ideas, which is extraordinary because we could be. But could that happen, without our muscle?
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Fri 22 Jun, 2007 01:36 am
Kara, I believe I know what a conservative or republican is supposed to be; I used to be one. Bush is none of those. Please show me where I'm wrong. Stem Cell has nothing to do with conservatism or republicanism. It has everything to do with his religion.
0 Replies
 
xingu
 
  1  
Reply Fri 22 Jun, 2007 05:40 am
Kara wrote:
c.i., his veto of stem cells has nothing to do with his possible insensitivity and probable ignorance of veteran's problems. He is a political animal, swept by the tides of his voting base. His stem cell veto is in line with his conservative base (although I think Bush is more of a Republican than a conservative.) He is perhaps not cognizant, or paying attention to, the burgeoning problems of the returning wounded service people.

xingu, we have always backed up our ideology with our military might. We are not the more powerful nation on earth because of our ideas, which is extraordinary because we could be. But could that happen, without our muscle?


First I believe Bush vetoed the stem cell bill because of his religious beliefs. He doesn't have to appeal to any base as he's not running for anymore offices.

I don't know that our ideas are extraorninary. What we offer is opportunity. Europe offers the same thing which is why they, like us, are having an immigration problem. Other countries offer freedom and hope.

What is the best country to live in? Not America.

Quote:
Norway still the world's best place to live

For the fourth year in a row, the United Nations has ranked Norway as having the highest standard of living in the world. Sweden, Australia and Canada are next in line, while the United States is further down the scale.
Norway, also known for its scenic beauty, is once again being hailed as the world's best country in which to live.

Norway tops UN list over best places to live - again - 24.07.2002
The annual ranking is based largely on average levels of education and income, combined with expected length of lifetime.

The report measured standards of living in 177 countries around the world. Other Nordic countries also ranked high, with Iceland in 7th place, Finland 13th and Denmark 17th.

Norway's gross national product per person amounted to USD 36,600, beaten only by Luxembourg. Its men and women are expected to live to an age of 78.9 years and Norway is one of 19 countries in the world with no measurable rates of illiteracy.

Researchers for the United Nations Development Program (UNDP) also weighed countries' degrees of cultural freedom in their analysis. They called cultural freedom a "basic human right," and awarded high scores in this year's UN Human Development Report to countries that accept immigrant cultures in addition to their own.

Norway's cultural diversity has blossomed in recent years, and public policies are aimed at integrating various ethnic groups and promoting tolerance.

Norway also was lauded for its high literacy rate in addition to educational levels and material wealth. Norwegians themselves generally point to their country's scenic beauty, recreational opportunities, clean water and fresh air.

The United States landed in eighth place on the list, while France, for example, was 16th.

The worst countries in which to live are all in Africa, according to the UN report. All 23 nations at the bottom of the list were African, with war-torn Sierra Leone in last place.

http://www.aftenposten.no/english/local/article828724.ece

Remember this?

"Give us your poor, your tired, your huddled masses longing to be free..."

We invaded Iraq and created a huge refugee problem. We will not take in but a very few Iraqi refugees, refugees we created.

Not so for Sweden.

Quote:
SODERTALJE, Sweden: Walking down the carpeted aisle of Sodertalje's low-slung St. John's Church one recent morning, Anders Lago's broad, blond features looked out of place among the hundreds of black-clad Iraqi mourners at a memorial service. Lago is the mayor of this scenic Swedish town of 60,000 people, which last year took in twice as many Iraqi refugees as the entire United States, almost all of them Christians fleeing the religious purge taking place amid Iraq's anti-American insurgency and sectarian strife.

So the mourners are now part of Lago's constituency, and their war is rapidly becoming Sodertalje's war - to the mayor's growing chagrin.

Sodertalje, he says, is reaching a breaking point and can no longer provide newcomers with even the basic services they have a right to expect.

About 9,000 Iraqis made it to Sweden in 2006 - almost half of the 22,000 who sought asylum in the entire industrialized world. This year, when the United States has promised to take in 7,000 Iraqis, around 20,000 are expected to seek asylum in Sweden.


http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/06/13/europe/sweden.php

I think there's a big difference between America of yesterday and of today. We've changed. Our arrogance and pride, our faith in military might and our vain belief that we are the leader of the world has turned us away from helping people to creating chaos and unstability.

We have become very unpopular in this world since George Bush became president.
0 Replies
 
Kara
 
  1  
Reply Fri 22 Jun, 2007 05:40 am
c.i., Very Happy ...I'm sure you know the definition of those terms well, from the inside out. Better than I, who am only slightly less liberal than I was when at Berkeley. I didn't mean to sound preachy, although my post sounds that way when I reread it. I was trying to say that the man is not a thinker, but we all know that.

I don't agree with the Republicans who are not in favor of stem cell research on unused embryos, but I understand why they believe what they do. I think their beliefs are sincere. I think their beliefs about Plan B are wrong, too, but who am I to say that life begins before implantation? I just don't think it does. If you believe something is murder, then you have to act on that belief.

I also find some people's reasoning specious when they say, He's pro-life but he believes in the death penalty and he is not terribly supportive of poor people AFTER they are born and struggling to live. We all think such contradictory things, sometimes, and I see that quite a few Republicans do not go along with the party line on stem cell research. I think one can have views toward an issue that are partial: you don't believe in one part of a belief statement but you go along with another part.
0 Replies
 
Kara
 
  1  
Reply Fri 22 Jun, 2007 09:16 am
xingu, I agree with almost everything you say. I'm not sure about the best place in which to live; that is still somewhat subjective.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Fri 22 Jun, 2007 06:08 pm
It seems the Bush regime and the high command are still playing games with the lives of our troops. Anybody know how a yo-yo works?


US may reduce forces in Iraq by spring By PAULINE JELINEK, Associated Press Writer
1 hour, 12 minutes ago



WASHINGTON - The U.S. may be able to reduce combat forces in Iraq by next spring if Iraq's own security forces continue to grow and improve, a senior American commander said Friday. He denied reports the U.S. is arming Sunni insurgent groups to help in the fight against al-Qaida.

Lt. Gen. Raymond Odierno, the top day-to-day commander of U.S. forces in Iraq, did not predict any reductions in U.S. forces but said such redeployments may be feasible by spring. There are currently 156,000 U.S. troops in Iraq.
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Fri 22 Jun, 2007 06:14 pm
Interesting!
0 Replies
 
Kara
 
  1  
Reply Fri 22 Jun, 2007 09:15 pm
c.i., I wonder about that. I read it all today, too.

Is this a political posting? I do not know what to believe anymore.

I do not understand people who want our troops to be withdrawn suddenly, or even soon. Why the sudden restlessness? Could it have to do with 2008 elections....surely not. Yeah.

If there is anyone with leadership ability and the articulateness to express it, someone who can lead this country into the next four years, I have not seen that person yet. We have hard decisions in front of us, and one can go on and on about why, who caused it, what wrong moves were made. I could do that, say that, and what is accomplished?

We will be moved ahead by a leader who has a vision of the next ten years, and YES, those are the ten years we will be in Iraq. We need to be shown the way by someone who is fearless, about how to deal with the challenges in this country we have occupied. I do not see that person yet. All I see are politicos who are backing and filling, and CYA'ing, and looking over their shoulders at the runners behind them.

Do any of you see that person, or that perspective, yet?
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Fri 22 Jun, 2007 10:42 pm
Kara, The primary reason I posted that article is very simple; Bushco and his gang keeps telling us we'll leave when they ask us to leave. Well, isn't it interesting that Bush is building the largest embassy in the world in Baghdad as we speak, and some 14 permanent bases in Iraq.

Then we get all this bullshite about "if" the Iraqis forces grow and improve, maybe, just maybe, we might be able to start withdrawing our troops.

God, Americans are stupid!
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 23 Jun, 2007 09:29 am
Roadside bombs in Iraq kill 7 troops

By BUSHRA JUHI, Associated Press Writer
51 minutes ago



BAGHDAD - Roadside bombs killed seven American troops in Iraq on Saturday, including four in a single strike outside Baghdad, the military said, as U.S. and Iraqi troops captured two senior al-Qaida militants in Diyala province.

Separately, a predawn operation by U.S. forces working with Iraqi informants in Baghdad's main Shiite district of Sadr City netted three other militants suspected of ties to Iran, the military said.

The Americans have accused Iran of providing mainly Shiite militias with training and powerful roadside bombs known as explosively formed projectiles, or EFPs, that have killed hundreds of U.S. troops in recent months.

Roadside bombs, including EFPs and other makeshift devices used by Sunni and Shiite militants alike, are the No. 1 killer of foreign troops in Iraq and Saturday's deaths were no exception.

Roadside bombs killed four soldiers northwest of the capital, a U.S. airman in Tikrit, and two U.S. soldiers in eastern Baghdad whose unit has recently targeted bomb networks. In addition, a British soldier died Saturday of wounds from a roadside bombing the day before in the southern city of Basra.
0 Replies
 
BumbleBeeBoogie
 
  1  
Reply Sat 23 Jun, 2007 10:07 am
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 23 Jun, 2007 12:04 pm
That the insurgents and others like al Qaeda would "flee" the areas where our troops are going to "move" is not a new phenomenon. With only 21,500 more troops, there is no way to control anything; even the place of battle. If our troops move east, the insurgents will move west.... it's a very simple tactic. After our troops take over a city, then move to another one, the insurgents will move back. It's not military strategy at all; it's child's play. It doesn't take a military strategist to figure this out.

It's like when Bush used to tell us we can't tell the enemy when we'll leave Iraq, because they'll just wait us out. Dumb and dumber; now our military is saying we may leave by XXXXX. Different scenario, I guess.

When we have stupid people running our country, we get stupid results.
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 0.11 seconds on 01/08/2025 at 12:23:17