"War" or "Occupation" - Which Is Correct?

Brandon9000 wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:

snookered wrote:

Advocate wrote:

The US does largely control the Iraqi government. We veto the latter's proposals on an almost daily basis.

Someone in my local paper said that it is not a surprise that Bush honored the Tuskegee Airmen. After all, who else will be left to send to Iraq.

Not only does an occupation require control of the Government, it needs control of the country as far as peace and order.

Someone in your local newspaper is a moron. Can I have his Email please and name of Paper, date etc.

Don't be a jerk.

An occupation does not require 'control' of the country. Russia occupied Afghanistan for a long time without ever having control.

Cycloptichorn

Isn't the difference that Russia installed a puppet government that simply did its bidding, whereas we only arranged elections? Russia didn't hold elections, but simply installed their choice.

You're joking, right?

You think the Iraqi government wasn't installed by us? Jeez

Cycloptichorn

The only reason we didn't essentially annex Iraq, and install a puppet government, is that we couldn't get away with it. We invaded to seize the oil, and even had maps drawn dividing up the country among the US oil companies. We quickly found out that we couldn't really subjugate the country and grab the oil.

Didn't you see my post of this morning? Also, with just a bit of research, one can find the map prepared by the administration dividing up the country by oil company.

I don't know to which Advocate refers, but this here has been widely published some time ago:

Maps and Charts of Iraqi Oil Fields

Sorry, but as I said I don't know to what source Advocate is referring.

So either do your own research or wait until you get his reply.

Have a good day.

There is much more evidence that the motivation of the so called "neo cons" for the intervention in Iraq had to do with their belief that we could (1) alter the otherwise destructive political trajectory of the Islamic world; and (2) secure long term strategic security for Israel, than that they were interested in securing petroleum at reduced prices - an absurd notion, given the well-developed world market for this commodity.

I think we can safely assume that if history was a tad different and the original jewish homeland was in central america, that the US wouldn't be nearly so likely to be seduced/steered into this destructive alliance.

blatham wrote:

I think we can safely assume that if history was a tad different and the original jewish homeland was in central america, that the US wouldn't be nearly so likely to be seduced/steered into this destructive alliance.

No, I don't think we can safely assume with no evidence that you can point to people and tell them their motives, particularly when they insist that their motives are something completely different. You are ignoring the possibility that we support Israel because of we sympathize with the historical plight of the Jewish people, and because we sympathize with the plight of a civilized country surrounded by barbarians and fanatical suicide bombers.

Brandon9000 wrote:

blatham wrote:

I think we can safely assume that if history was a tad different and the original jewish homeland was in central america, that the US wouldn't be nearly so likely to be seduced/steered into this destructive alliance.

No, I don't think we can safely assume with no evidence that you can point to people and tell them their motives, particularly when they insist that their motives are something completely different. You are ignoring the possibility that we support Israel because of we sympathize with the historical plight of the Jewish people, and because we sympathize with the plight of a civilized country surrounded by barbarians and fanatical suicide bombers.

Oh, please. What a crock.

We support Israel because it is in our military and economic interests to do so. Nothing more.

Cycloptichorn

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Brandon9000 wrote:

blatham wrote:

I think we can safely assume that if history was a tad different and the original jewish homeland was in central america, that the US wouldn't be nearly so likely to be seduced/steered into this destructive alliance.

No, I don't think we can safely assume with no evidence that you can point to people and tell them their motives, particularly when they insist that their motives are something completely different. You are ignoring the possibility that we support Israel because of we sympathize with the historical plight of the Jewish people, and because we sympathize with the plight of a civilized country surrounded by barbarians and fanatical suicide bombers.

Oh, please. What a crock.

We support Israel because it is in our military and economic interests to do so. Nothing more.

Cycloptichorn

You are asserting a fact, specifically the motives of the people in the American government. To assert a fact, one must have some sort of evidence that it's true, or the assertion isn't worth much. What evidence or argument can you present to lend creedence to what you're asserting are other people's motives?

Speaking for myself alone, if I were the president, I would strongly support Israel whether we gained anything from it or not. Since I feel this way, it's not implausible to me that others do too.

Yet there is also an over-arching reality that America and the west depend on these oil resources. It is an absolute dependence. Probably no commodity outside of food, water and breathable air is more essential. The presence of the west in this region is not because Israel is there. I think we can safely assume that if history was a tad different and the original jewish homeland was in central america, that the US wouldn't be nearly so likely to be seduced/steered into this destructive alliance.

Politics, as Dewey said, is the shadow cast by business. The presence of so many oil people and interests in this particular administration isn't coincidence.

I can assert that the Earth has been guarded for the last century by kindly aliens, who have ships at the edge of our solar system guarding us from unfriendly aliens, but with no evidence whatsoever, the assertion isn't worth anything. You're claiming to have read other people's minds unless you can come up with some sort of factual support for your assertion of their motives.

I feel, and many people who think like I do feel, that supporting decent, democratic, civilized people from attack by barbaric fascists intent on destroying them is worthwhile.