9
   

THE US, THE UN AND IRAQ, ELEVENTH THREAD

 
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Fri 14 Dec, 2007 12:33 pm
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.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Fri 14 Dec, 2007 12:57 pm
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
0 Replies
 
hamburger
 
  1  
Reply Fri 14 Dec, 2007 06:53 pm
a very interesting turn of events imo .
the invitation to the iranian president to perform the hajj , seems to indicate that the saudi royal family feels that iran has a vital role to play in the middle east .
i wonder if U.S. middle-east expert have expected relations between these two countries to become rather cordial .
certainly is an interesting accomodation by the two parties .
hbg

Quote:
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.



source :
SAUDI-ARABIA
0 Replies
 
revel
 
  1  
Reply Sat 15 Dec, 2007 09:28 am
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)
0 Replies
 
hamburger
 
  1  
Reply Sat 15 Dec, 2007 10:11 am
Quote:
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)


i'm sure you know the old saying , revel :
"BLOOD IS THICKER THAN WATER" !
and that applies to the people of the middle-east as much as to others .

holding hands with prince addullah probably wasn't a bad idea but not good enough for the saudis - after all , iran is pretty much on their doorsteps and could cause a lot of trouble for the royal house of the saudis - better to make nice !

http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0426/csmimg/04-26_DU.jpg
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Sat 15 Dec, 2007 12:36 pm
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?
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 15 Dec, 2007 01:28 pm
ican keeps forgetting the simple stuff; genearl Petraeus said the war in Iraq can only be won on two fronts; political and military. The political front is worse today than it was before the surge.

Some people just "never get it." A blind fool never gains (in)sight when they suffer from myopia.
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Sat 15 Dec, 2007 02:07 pm
cicerone imposter wrote:

...
The political front is worse today than it was before the surge.
...

That's your wrong opinion!
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 15 Dec, 2007 02:34 pm
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?
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 15 Dec, 2007 02:44 pm
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."
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Sat 15 Dec, 2007 03:14 pm
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
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Sat 15 Dec, 2007 03:15 pm
cicerone imposter wrote:
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?

Find me a credible source that Iraq's politics are not better today than all that.
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  1  
Reply Sat 15 Dec, 2007 03:17 pm
Cycloptichorn wrote:
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

In my opinion, that of course is your opinion stated without a rational argument to support it.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Sat 15 Dec, 2007 03:21 pm
I've stopped bothering. You don't seem to be very interested in logic or rationality.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
realjohnboy
 
  1  
Reply Sat 15 Dec, 2007 03:39 pm
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."
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 15 Dec, 2007 03:49 pm
cicerone imposter wrote:
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."


ican, General Petraeus said "it's going nowhere." You got better info?
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 15 Dec, 2007 03:50 pm
cicerone imposter wrote:
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."


ican, General Petraeus said "it's going nowhere." You got better info?
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Sat 15 Dec, 2007 04:02 pm
realjohnboy wrote:
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."


I'm sorry to say that I don't follow how that example relates to our current situation, Rjb. Who corresponds to poster 1? I made no such affirmative claims without providing evidence. Unless you are referring to Ican as poster 1. That I would understand.

I also base my comments on a far more over-arcing look at the conversations that Ican and I have had for years; while I admire his complete inability to be swayed by any sort of event, I don't admire his desire to stifle voices that dissent with him.

I read your comment a few pages back, and meant to respond, but forgot; I will say that the conversation dragging on for so long has undoubtedly lead to some breakdown in argumentation on both sides. When it comes to the presentation of evidence that, as you said, 'everyone already knows,' I would have to respectfully disagree; every week, I read articles and information about the Iraq war in this thread that I didn't previously know, much of it posted by Ican. Therefore, I do believe there is substantial value added by posting articles and arguments, both pro- and anti-war in nature.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
realjohnboy
 
  1  
Reply Sat 15 Dec, 2007 04:05 pm
Poster #1 was referring to Ican. He has a habit of that kind of logic.
0 Replies
 
hamburger
 
  1  
Reply Sat 15 Dec, 2007 04:30 pm
there is one way of showing SUCCESS in iraq - the british way :
GET OUT OF IRAQ - one step at a time - and leave the iraqis to clean up the mess .


Quote:
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


isn't it simply wonderful to see how easy it is to be succesfull in iraq Crying or Very sad
hbg


source :
BRITISH ARE LEAVING BASRA
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
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
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 07/19/2025 at 05:04:30