ican711nm wrote:Cycloptichorn wrote:ican711nm wrote:Cycloptichorn wrote:
...
It was not Mein Kampf that made Hitler dangerous, but the massive mechanized armies and unified populaces that he controlled. We face no such threat from Al Qaeda, not in the slightest. Therefore, your mention of Hitler is not only misplaced but evidence of a weak argument; Godwin's law nails you.
Cycloptichorn
Mein Kampf was Hitler's 1924 declaration of intentions which in the early 1930s materialized in the form of "massive mechanized armies and unified populaces that he controlled." Subsequently it materialized 1939 as a war against Poland. Subsequently it materialized 1941 as a declaration of war against the USA. Subsequently it materialized 1942 as a war that eventually mass murdered millions of Europeans, and killed thousands of USA military.
Sure. When AQ starts taking over non-muslim nations, or takes over muslim nations and uses them to attack us, give me a call and share your alarmism. Not before.
Cycloptichorn
Cycloptichorn wrote:
First of all, I don't hate Bush - I pity him. Please be accurate.
Second of all, I don't plan on curtailing sh*t. That's not what America is about, jack. If it hurts the cause of a war that I don't support in the slightest - good.
Third, taking guns away from Iraqi policewomen is not only sexist, it is against your goals; they cannot be effective law enforcement agents in Iraq without them.
Cycloptichorn
True to form!
If AQ were to start taking over non-muslim nations, or take over muslim nations and use them to attack us, then you wouldn't need any call from me. Instead you would need a hole to hide in.
Let's see now,
1942 - 1924 = 18
1996 +18 = 2014.
2014 - 2007 = 7
enjoy!
Sure, because the past usually is a pretty accurate prediction of the future.
Look, I don't think that my trying to convince you or others of my opinion (or merely opining because I enjoy doing so) is wrong. But you act as if it's wrong. Is it wrong?
Cycloptichorn
Cycloptichorn wrote:ican711nm wrote:Cycloptichorn wrote:ican711nm wrote:Cycloptichorn wrote:
...
It was not Mein Kampf that made Hitler dangerous, but the massive mechanized armies and unified populaces that he controlled. We face no such threat from Al Qaeda, not in the slightest. Therefore, your mention of Hitler is not only misplaced but evidence of a weak argument; Godwin's law nails you.
Cycloptichorn
Mein Kampf was Hitler's 1924 declaration of intentions which in the early 1930s materialized in the form of "massive mechanized armies and unified populaces that he controlled." Subsequently it materialized 1939 as a war against Poland. Subsequently it materialized 1941 as a declaration of war against the USA. Subsequently it materialized 1942 as a war that eventually mass murdered millions of Europeans, and killed thousands of USA military.
Sure. When AQ starts taking over non-muslim nations, or takes over muslim nations and uses them to attack us, give me a call and share your alarmism. Not before.
Cycloptichorn
Cycloptichorn wrote:
First of all, I don't hate Bush - I pity him. Please be accurate.
Second of all, I don't plan on curtailing sh*t. That's not what America is about, jack. If it hurts the cause of a war that I don't support in the slightest - good.
Third, taking guns away from Iraqi policewomen is not only sexist, it is against your goals; they cannot be effective law enforcement agents in Iraq without them.
Cycloptichorn
True to form!
If AQ were to start taking over non-muslim nations, or take over muslim nations and use them to attack us, then you wouldn't need any call from me. Instead you would need a hole to hide in.
Let's see now,
1942 - 1924 = 18
1996 +18 = 2014.
2014 - 2007 = 7
enjoy!
Sure, because the past usually is a pretty accurate prediction of the future.
Look, I don't think that my trying to convince you or others of my opinion (or merely opining because I enjoy doing so) is wrong. But you act as if it's wrong. Is it wrong?
Cycloptichorn
It is not wrong of you to express your opinion or to try to convince people your opinion is right.
That which is wrong is your opinion. That of course is my opinion. It is also my opinion that my opinions are right.
It is also my opinion that it is not wrong of me to express my opinion or to try to convince people my opinion is right.
The murders of Iraqi non-murderers by Iraqi murderers continues to far exceed 30 per day. Even 10 per day would be horrible. Stopping this requires both US and Iraq government competence and persistence, and curtailment of chronic outspoken pessimism by our hate-Bush crowd.
Friday, December 14, 2007
King Abdullah invites Iranian President to Saudi Arabia to perform the hajjAgence France-Presse
Published: Friday, December 14, 2007
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, is to perform the hajj in SaudiArabia, thefirst timeanIranianpresident is toattend the annual Muslim pilgrimage to Mecca and Medina, an official said yesterday. Mr. Ahmadinejad's senior advisor, Mojtaba Samareh Hashemi, said he had been personally invited by King Abdullah. The invitation is significant as relations between Shiite-majority Iran and Sunni-majority
Saudi Arabia have been rocky at times, reaching an all-time low in July, 1987, when 402 people, mostly Iranians, were killed in clashes between Iranians and Saudi security forces during the hajj. Riyadh was, also at the time, backing Saddam Hussein's Iraq in its 1980-1988 war against
Iran. Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini later accused the kingdom of being a lackey of the United States that was unable to look after holy sites.
Copyright © 2007 CanWest Interactive, a division of CanWest MediaWorks Publications, Inc.. All rights reserved.
Well; you know what they say, hambugers about enemies and bed fellows. The Saudis may use us but I doubt they like us and they probably sense the atmosphere is ok to be cordial to Iran without too much backlash. (least thats my guess sitting here miles and oceans away in my living room)
ican711nm wrote:Cycloptichorn wrote:ican711nm wrote:Cycloptichorn wrote:ican711nm wrote:Cycloptichorn wrote:
...
It was not Mein Kampf that made Hitler dangerous, but the massive mechanized armies and unified populaces that he controlled. We face no such threat from Al Qaeda, not in the slightest. Therefore, your mention of Hitler is not only misplaced but evidence of a weak argument; Godwin's law nails you.
Cycloptichorn
Mein Kampf was Hitler's 1924 declaration of intentions which in the early 1930s materialized in the form of "massive mechanized armies and unified populaces that he controlled." Subsequently it materialized 1939 as a war against Poland. Subsequently it materialized 1941 as a declaration of war against the USA. Subsequently it materialized 1942 as a war that eventually mass murdered millions of Europeans, and killed thousands of USA military.
Sure. When AQ starts taking over non-muslim nations, or takes over muslim nations and uses them to attack us, give me a call and share your alarmism. Not before.
Cycloptichorn
Cycloptichorn wrote:
First of all, I don't hate Bush - I pity him. Please be accurate.
Second of all, I don't plan on curtailing sh*t. That's not what America is about, jack. If it hurts the cause of a war that I don't support in the slightest - good.
Third, taking guns away from Iraqi policewomen is not only sexist, it is against your goals; they cannot be effective law enforcement agents in Iraq without them.
Cycloptichorn
True to form!
If AQ were to start taking over non-muslim nations, or take over muslim nations and use them to attack us, then you wouldn't need any call from me. Instead you would need a hole to hide in.
Let's see now,
1942 - 1924 = 18
1996 +18 = 2014.
2014 - 2007 = 7
enjoy!
Sure, because the past usually is a pretty accurate prediction of the future.
Look, I don't think that my trying to convince you or others of my opinion (or merely opining because I enjoy doing so) is wrong. But you act as if it's wrong. Is it wrong?
Cycloptichorn
It is not wrong of you to express your opinion or to try to convince people your opinion is right.
That which is wrong is your opinion. That of course is my opinion. It is also my opinion that my opinions are right.
It is also my opinion that it is not wrong of me to express my opinion or to try to convince people my opinion is right.
I agree (that it's not wrong to post your opinions, not that my opinion is wrong, of course) - but posts such as this make me question whether you really do:
Quote:
The murders of Iraqi non-murderers by Iraqi murderers continues to far exceed 30 per day. Even 10 per day would be horrible. Stopping this requires both US and Iraq government competence and persistence, and curtailment of chronic outspoken pessimism by our hate-Bush crowd.
Why would the curtailment of pessimism help stop the level of murders in Iraq? Why should it be curtailed, if you don't see it as wrong?
Cycloptichorn
...
The political front is worse today than it was before the surge.
...
Cycloptichorn wrote:ican711nm wrote:Cycloptichorn wrote:ican711nm wrote:Cycloptichorn wrote:ican711nm wrote:Cycloptichorn wrote:
...
It was not Mein Kampf that made Hitler dangerous, but the massive mechanized armies and unified populaces that he controlled. We face no such threat from Al Qaeda, not in the slightest. Therefore, your mention of Hitler is not only misplaced but evidence of a weak argument; Godwin's law nails you.
Cycloptichorn
Mein Kampf was Hitler's 1924 declaration of intentions which in the early 1930s materialized in the form of "massive mechanized armies and unified populaces that he controlled." Subsequently it materialized 1939 as a war against Poland. Subsequently it materialized 1941 as a declaration of war against the USA. Subsequently it materialized 1942 as a war that eventually mass murdered millions of Europeans, and killed thousands of USA military.
Sure. When AQ starts taking over non-muslim nations, or takes over muslim nations and uses them to attack us, give me a call and share your alarmism. Not before.
Cycloptichorn
Cycloptichorn wrote:
First of all, I don't hate Bush - I pity him. Please be accurate.
Second of all, I don't plan on curtailing sh*t. That's not what America is about, jack. If it hurts the cause of a war that I don't support in the slightest - good.
Third, taking guns away from Iraqi policewomen is not only sexist, it is against your goals; they cannot be effective law enforcement agents in Iraq without them.
Cycloptichorn
True to form!
If AQ were to start taking over non-muslim nations, or take over muslim nations and use them to attack us, then you wouldn't need any call from me. Instead you would need a hole to hide in.
Let's see now,
1942 - 1924 = 18
1996 +18 = 2014.
2014 - 2007 = 7
enjoy!
Sure, because the past usually is a pretty accurate prediction of the future.
Look, I don't think that my trying to convince you or others of my opinion (or merely opining because I enjoy doing so) is wrong. But you act as if it's wrong. Is it wrong?
Cycloptichorn
It is not wrong of you to express your opinion or to try to convince people your opinion is right.
That which is wrong is your opinion. That of course is my opinion. It is also my opinion that my opinions are right.
It is also my opinion that it is not wrong of me to express my opinion or to try to convince people my opinion is right.
I agree (that it's not wrong to post your opinions, not that my opinion is wrong, of course) - but posts such as this make me question whether you really do:
Quote:
The murders of Iraqi non-murderers by Iraqi murderers continues to far exceed 30 per day. Even 10 per day would be horrible. Stopping this requires both US and Iraq government competence and persistence, and curtailment of chronic outspoken pessimism by our hate-Bush crowd.
Why would the curtailment of pessimism help stop the level of murders in Iraq? Why should it be curtailed, if you don't see it as wrong?
Cycloptichorn
First, not all, only some of, your opinions consist of chronic outspoken pessimism.
Second, chronic outspoken pessimism in the face of evidence of progress, however slow, is an opinion which is not justifiable and consequently is a wrong opinion.
Third chronic outspoken pessimism in the face of evidence of progress, however slow, encourages the mass murderers in Iraq to continue their mass murdering in the hope that such criticism will eventually wear down US resolve to persist in Iraq until the mass murdering in Iraq is controllable by the Iraqis by themselves.
Fourth, chronic outspoken pessimism in the face of evidence of progress, however slow, contributes to the satisfaction of those mass murdering in Iraq.
Got it now?
ican, Find us a credible source that shows Iraq's politics is better today than it was a) before our invasion, b) before/after Saddam, and c) after the surge?
ican711nm wrote:Cycloptichorn wrote:ican711nm wrote:Cycloptichorn wrote:ican711nm wrote:Cycloptichorn wrote:ican711nm wrote:Cycloptichorn wrote:
...
It was not Mein Kampf that made Hitler dangerous, but the massive mechanized armies and unified populaces that he controlled. We face no such threat from Al Qaeda, not in the slightest. Therefore, your mention of Hitler is not only misplaced but evidence of a weak argument; Godwin's law nails you.
Cycloptichorn
Mein Kampf was Hitler's 1924 declaration of intentions which in the early 1930s materialized in the form of "massive mechanized armies and unified populaces that he controlled." Subsequently it materialized 1939 as a war against Poland. Subsequently it materialized 1941 as a declaration of war against the USA. Subsequently it materialized 1942 as a war that eventually mass murdered millions of Europeans, and killed thousands of USA military.
Sure. When AQ starts taking over non-muslim nations, or takes over muslim nations and uses them to attack us, give me a call and share your alarmism. Not before.
Cycloptichorn
Cycloptichorn wrote:
First of all, I don't hate Bush - I pity him. Please be accurate.
Second of all, I don't plan on curtailing sh*t. That's not what America is about, jack. If it hurts the cause of a war that I don't support in the slightest - good.
Third, taking guns away from Iraqi policewomen is not only sexist, it is against your goals; they cannot be effective law enforcement agents in Iraq without them.
Cycloptichorn
True to form!
If AQ were to start taking over non-muslim nations, or take over muslim nations and use them to attack us, then you wouldn't need any call from me. Instead you would need a hole to hide in.
Let's see now,
1942 - 1924 = 18
1996 +18 = 2014.
2014 - 2007 = 7
enjoy!
Sure, because the past usually is a pretty accurate prediction of the future.
Look, I don't think that my trying to convince you or others of my opinion (or merely opining because I enjoy doing so) is wrong. But you act as if it's wrong. Is it wrong?
Cycloptichorn
It is not wrong of you to express your opinion or to try to convince people your opinion is right.
That which is wrong is your opinion. That of course is my opinion. It is also my opinion that my opinions are right.
It is also my opinion that it is not wrong of me to express my opinion or to try to convince people my opinion is right.
I agree (that it's not wrong to post your opinions, not that my opinion is wrong, of course) - but posts such as this make me question whether you really do:
Quote:
The murders of Iraqi non-murderers by Iraqi murderers continues to far exceed 30 per day. Even 10 per day would be horrible. Stopping this requires both US and Iraq government competence and persistence, and curtailment of chronic outspoken pessimism by our hate-Bush crowd.
Why would the curtailment of pessimism help stop the level of murders in Iraq? Why should it be curtailed, if you don't see it as wrong?
Cycloptichorn
First, not all, only some of, your opinions consist of chronic outspoken pessimism.
Second, chronic outspoken pessimism in the face of evidence of progress, however slow, is an opinion which is not justifiable and consequently is a wrong opinion.
Third chronic outspoken pessimism in the face of evidence of progress, however slow, encourages the mass murderers in Iraq to continue their mass murdering in the hope that such criticism will eventually wear down US resolve to persist in Iraq until the mass murdering in Iraq is controllable by the Iraqis by themselves.
Fourth, chronic outspoken pessimism in the face of evidence of progress, however slow, contributes to the satisfaction of those mass murdering in Iraq.
Got it now?
I disagree with each of your points, and charge that they are in fact nothing more then sour grapes - from one who has lost the argument long ago.
Cycloptichorn
From the Economist:
Alas, there has so far been no sign that the government of Nuri al-Maliki is poised to grab this opportunity. Indeed, as an adviser to General Petraeus glumly describes it, "The politics is going nowhere." The government still acts like a collection of competing fiefs, not a body that speaks with a national voice. Even among Shias, a paralysing factionalism has, if anything, got worse. The two principal Shia parties, Mr Maliki's Dawa and the better-organised Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq (ISCI), both fear the mass appeal of Muqtada al-Sadr, who has stayed out of government but often calls the shots on the streets.
Worse, Mr Maliki is still failing to reach out effectively to the Sunnis. The main Sunni block in parliament, which had a clutch of ministries in the ruling coalition, continues to take no part in government. Relations worsened recently when a son of Adnan al-Dulaimi, a leader of the biggest Sunni block in parliament, was arrested with some 30 of his father's personal guards on suspicion of involvement in insurgent bombings. To cap it all, the Sunnis are sorely divided too?-and not just over al-Qaeda. The main Sunni block in parliament is deeply wary of the Awakening in Anbar, which may displace it as the authentic voice of the Sunnis nationwide.
Mr Maliki himself sounds particularly hostile to the notion of the CLCs?-the mainly Sunni tribal militias?-being inducted into the security forces or civil service as part of the price of peace. The new Shia establishment hates the arming of the Sunni militias because it thinks they may one day turn their guns against the Shias.
The current edgy lull is due in large measure to a series of local deals cut between the American army (and the British army in Basra) and groups close to the insurgents, with the centrally run state thereby diminished. Indeed, it can be argued that such deals are eroding the state and its fragile institutions still more. But it may be the only way to go.
From the Economist:
Alas, there has so far been no sign that the government of Nuri al-Maliki is poised to grab this opportunity. Indeed, as an adviser to General Petraeus glumly describes it, "The politics is going nowhere." The government still acts like a collection of competing fiefs, not a body that speaks with a national voice. Even among Shias, a paralysing factionalism has, if anything, got worse. The two principal Shia parties, Mr Maliki's Dawa and the better-organised Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq (ISCI), both fear the mass appeal of Muqtada al-Sadr, who has stayed out of government but often calls the shots on the streets.
Worse, Mr Maliki is still failing to reach out effectively to the Sunnis. The main Sunni block in parliament, which had a clutch of ministries in the ruling coalition, continues to take no part in government. Relations worsened recently when a son of Adnan al-Dulaimi, a leader of the biggest Sunni block in parliament, was arrested with some 30 of his father's personal guards on suspicion of involvement in insurgent bombings. To cap it all, the Sunnis are sorely divided too?-and not just over al-Qaeda. The main Sunni block in parliament is deeply wary of the Awakening in Anbar, which may displace it as the authentic voice of the Sunnis nationwide.
Mr Maliki himself sounds particularly hostile to the notion of the CLCs?-the mainly Sunni tribal militias?-being inducted into the security forces or civil service as part of the price of peace. The new Shia establishment hates the arming of the Sunni militias because it thinks they may one day turn their guns against the Shias.
The current edgy lull is due in large measure to a series of local deals cut between the American army (and the British army in Basra) and groups close to the insurgents, with the centrally run state thereby diminished. Indeed, it can be argued that such deals are eroding the state and its fragile institutions still more. But it may be the only way to go.
Cyclo, you just don't understand the logic here:
Poster #1: "My research proves that there is no Santa Claus."
Poster #2: "Can you source your evidence?"
Poster #1: "If you disagree with me, source your evidence that there is a Santa Claus. If you can't or won't, then there is no Santa Claus."
Uncertainty follows Basra exit
By Paul Wood
BBC News, Basra
On Sunday, Britain forces are due to hand over control of security in Basra, the last area of Iraq for which they still have responsibility.
It's hoped the transfer will allow British forces to draw down to some 2,500 by spring next year - from the current strength of 4,700.
Our Middle East correspondent, Paul Wood, has written this assessment:
Basra: March, 2007. It was the third time the same black car had passed by at the end of the dusty street. The British patrol knew they were being scoped out, possibly for an ambush.
Sure enough, there was a muzzle flash from a roof-top. Then another from the opposite side of the road. The corporal doing top cover on our vehicle let loose with the heavy machine gun, bullet casings spitting out like a scene from a Tarantino movie.
Eventually, the smoke cleared. The snipers were gone. The British patrol had survived.
Combat footage
Back at the base, still flushed with adrenalin, the corporal approached our cameraman.
"Errr, you're not going to use that are you?" he asked. Yes, we said, it's some of the best combat footage from Basra there is. "Ahh, said the corporal, the trouble is I told my mum I was just a cook and I never left camp. When she sees this, she's going to know that's not true."
Over the past four years, the British Army has employed a similarly comforting narrative: honest mum, the local security forces are really good, they are our friends and soon they'll take over so we can leave.
Often, events told a different story: for example when that angry crowd set alight a soldier as he scrambled out of his armoured vehicle - the single best known image of the British in Basra - and not one of the city's 20,000 police came to help.
Army defeated
There was a time when British troops were being attacked every time they went outside the wire. It's one of the reasons they withdrew from the city centre to the airport outside.
A British general told me - privately and off the record of course - that the Army had been defeated, pure and simple.
But, said one officer on the phone from Basra on Friday, everyone predicted that when we left, Basra would burn. But it didn't happen. That's a major success, he said.
This officer agreed that the city was plagued by rival militias and criminal gangs, but what had changed was that, finally, the local security forces were equipped to deal with it.
Over the past four years, I've been told many times that this police chief or that Iraqi general was taking charge and would end the violence. But the new police chief, General Jalil Khalaf, does seem different. For one thing, he's already survived seven assassination attempts, a sign of how seriously the militias are taking his attempt to clean up Basra.
Conditions dreadful
The British are not handing over a Basra at peace. For ordinary Basrawis conditions are simply dreadful. Forty-two women have been murdered over the past three months for wearing make-up, or failing to wear the hejab, the Islamic headscarf.
On official figures half of the city's Christian population has fled - and that's probably an underestimate.
In October, the main police station in the city centre was over-run by Mahdi Army militiamen trying to free one of their comrades.
However, the important lesson of that, say British officials, is that the Iraqi police and army cleared up the problem themselves, regaining control of the building within the hour. British assistance was not needed.
So, on Sunday, there will be a ceremony to hand over the last British province in Iraq It will start, as is customary, with a reading from the Koran.
Then the British commanding general and the governor of Basra will sign a document saying, in essence, that Iraqi problems are now for the Iraqis alone to solve.
Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/middle_east/7145597.stm
Published: 2007/12/15 09:12:42 GMT
