Entire Middle East Not Worth the Bones of a Single US Marine

[GeoffP]

dear geoff,

I hope all is well.

i was wondering what the resistance/intifada over the least 40 years was in response too.

~~~~~~~~~
take it ez
zak

In reponse to West Bank intrusions (among other reasons valid and invalid), which were in response to repeated invasions (as per the desire for a buffer zone for a country approximately 15 km wide) which were in response to the Jewish inhabitants not acting like proper dhimmis which was in response to not wanting to be ruthlessly and viciously exploited at the hands of any interested party from the segment of the population considered "protectors" over the "dhimmis". Sort of like the victims of gangsterism fighting back against the gangsters. This doesn't mean that all individuals exploited them, but rather that the political-social system (and local Arab leaders) so allowed and encouraged it, which is sufficiently perverse and sick in and of itself.

And how was your weekend?

 

[Zakariya04]

in response to the Jewish inhabitants not acting like proper dhimmis which was in response to not wanting to be ruthlessly and viciously exploited at the hands of any interested party from the segment of the population considered "protectors" over the "dhimmis". Sort of like the victims of gangsterism fighting back against the gangsters. This doesn't mean that all individuals exploited them, but rather that the political-social system (and local Arab leaders) so allowed and encouraged it, which is sufficiently perverse and sick in and of itself.

and I thought most of the Jews came to live in Israel after 1948!!

Surely you cant tell me that Israel has done evrything for the good

And how was your weekend?

My weekend was pretty shite actually MR geoff, doing month end and shit like that, however my company's turnover is up about 300% on this time last year so shit aint that bad

Take care
Zak

 

[Zephyr]

The bones of any dead soldier are only worth something to worms and vultures.

 

[madanthonywayne]

I disagree with this statement. If you believe that the US is on a civilizing mission, then yes, this assertion would make sense

Well, there's the crux of our disagreement.

This statement brings up a variety of false assertions on your part. Those fighting against America in Iraq are not Islamofascists, fundamentalists, or whatever you may want to call them. These are small Iraqi groups who believe they are fighting for the defense of their people. Even the term Islamofascist, is a very degrading xenophobic term which means absolutely nothing. You must understand that in a society which is in turmoil, various groups arise, many which are exploiting the situation of lawlessness in Iraq, however not all these groups can be are necessarily evil. There are still people in Iraq with pride in their country who believe fighting oppression is a noble endeavor. Another point, Muslims generally don't like it when people use the term Islamofascist, as this term is used alot by Islam-haters and those who continue to pray on the ignorance of the masses such as some evangelical organizations in America.

I figured that term would piss you off. But I still say if you compare life under the Taliban or any Islamic extreemist type government, it's not too different from life in a fascist country.

Whether you agree or not, the situation from an Iraqi persepective unfolds like this. Saddam is a brutal dictator supported by the West. When the oil-rich province of Kuwait breaks away from Iraq, the US attacks Iraq. Sanctions and continous bombing in the 90s leave Iraqi socitey in shambles with a million children dead of malnutrition. In 2003, the US military fabricates the myth of WMDs in Iraq to finish off the once proud nation, which has been weakened from the most powerful Arab nation to begging for relief from sanctions. The US military plays the different Iraqi parties against each other igniting civil war. Then the US uses this situation to maintain their right to stay on Iraqi land and privatise their oil fields to American companies.

Ok. Remember way back when when Bush had his "mission accomplished" photo op? He'd have loved to pull the troops out right after that.

American troops are only still there because the insurgents keep raising hell. You want the occupation to end? Stop fighting. That's all it would take.

You want to have a say in your government? VOTE. Iraq is now a democracy, if the government can stand, that is.

But the Islamofascists don't want Democracy. They want an extreemist state under Sharia law.

Saying the Entire Middle East is not worth a single American sounds pretty rascist to me. If you really feel that way, America needs to leave the Middle East forever, that would make both our people happy.

We'd love to, if Islamic extreemists would quit raising hell all over the world. If Iraq ends badly, I foresee a much larger conflict between Islam and the West in the near future. A war on the scale of WW2, perhaps worse.

The extreemists will be emboldened by their victory in Iraq and use the money from oil to finance ever increasing terror attacks until nukes are finally used. This will unleash a war of aniliation, nukes all over the place. A war of biblical proportions such as that described in revelations may be on the horizon.

Those are the stakes. So should the US leave in humiliation from Iraq, enjoy the "victory" while it lasts. Worse will soon follow. Much worse.

 

[hypewaders]

Above are assumptions from madantonywayne too foul and ludicrous to leave stinking up and staining our dialogues here:

1. "the crux": The United States is "civilizing" the Mideast through military intervention.

The results have proven to be the opposite: Breakdown of infrastructure and social order, and the empowerment of radical, fundamentalist reactionism. What's worse, the anger over the unjustified destruction of Iraq is not confined to Iraq. The White Man's Burden was widely recognized as a political disease long ago. A return to such policy can only breed a manipulable rage that is righteous in its kernel, and hence more enduring than any profiteering enterprise.

2. Armageddon: "If Iraq ends badly, I foresee a much larger conflict... on the scale of WW2, perhaps worse... The extreemists will be emboldened by their victory in Iraq and use the money from oil to finance ever increasing terror attacks until nukes are finally used. This will unleash a war of aniliation, nukes all over the place. A war of biblical proportions such as that described in revelations may be on the horizon. Worse will soon follow. Much worse."

That is jumping to such exaggerated conclusions that the only way I can explain this fiery rhetoric is that madanthonywayne is engaging in baseless fear-mongering, motivated by his refusal to admit that the American experiment in Iraq has already definitively failed. Fortunately, such cries of "fire!" in a crowded theater are now falling out of favor with the American public, because we have already been witness to our own deception at the dishonest hands of leading neoconservative fear-mongers over this very issue. Madanthonywayne is in denial, and apparently would willingly sacrifice the entire world to stay that way. For as long as we can point out the irrationality of his (and his far-right mentors') shrieking, we can put our nation's affairs right again calmly, and wisely forgo both the White Man's Burden, and Armageddon.

 

[Gently Passing]

To tell you the honest truth about my feelings regarding "Democracy" in America:

I did a bit of 'country shopping' when George W. Bush was re-elected in 2004.

Since my freedoms here are dwindling by the day and we are led ever further down the path of certain destruction by our incompetent, tyrannical leaders I thought perhaps I might find a country in this world which might offer me some vestige of the Constitutional rights I was told I was entitled to as a child...

But alas, coming from this nation (the US) no country in the world is likely to take me.

Who can blame them?

 

[terryoh]

Israel is well functioning democracy in the middle east.

Pwnt

Israel was a negotiated country by the UN. It was not invaded by a larger democratic country to specifically set up a democratic country.

 

[madanthonywayne]

Above are assumptions from madantonywayne too foul and ludicrous to leave stinking up and staining our dialogues here:

That is jumping to such exaggerated conclusions that the only way I can explain this fiery rhetoric is that madanthonywayne is engaging in baseless fear-mongering, motivated by his refusal to admit that the American experiment in Iraq has already definitively failed.

Wow. Foul, ludicrous,and fiery. The trifecta!

All I can say is, should we get the early withdrawl you favor, we'll see. If it does come to pass, I sincerely hope you're correct and our leaving results in peace and love in the middle east and all over the world.

Though I would predict genocide soon after our withdrawl, followed by Iraq becoming a safe haven for terrorists, followed by mushroom clouds all over the place.

 

[hypewaders]

"I would predict genocide soon after our withdrawl, followed by Iraq becoming a safe haven for terrorists, followed by mushroom clouds all over the place."

Let's revisit this thread in a year then, when an effectively unconditional US withdrawal will likely be in full swing. I'm willing to be patient with your basic geopolitical education.

For now, can you address my answers to your question, or is that too much of a challenge for you?

 

[madanthonywayne]

"I would predict genocide soon after our withdrawl, followed by Iraq becoming a safe haven for terrorists, followed by mushroom clouds all over the place."

Let's revisit this thread in a year then, when an effectively unconditional US withdrawal will likely be in full swing.

You got it.

It's too bad there's no "time capsule" type function that would make a thread automatically pop up again on a certain date.

 

[hypewaders]

Don't worry. I have a good memory. So: Please consider and respond to my answers to your question- Or have you been only superficially trolling?

 

[DiamondHearts]

All I can say is, should we get the early withdrawl you favor, we'll see. If it does come to pass, I sincerely hope you're correct and our leaving results in peace and love in the middle east and all over the world.

Though I would predict genocide soon after our withdrawl, followed by Iraq becoming a safe haven for terrorists, followed by mushroom clouds all over the place.

My friend, I think it is rather unfair to confine the war in Iraq to a black and white choice between withdrawing, or keeping US troops dying in Iraq. The war in Iraq represents a massive failure on part of the Bush Administration. The WMD propaganda was a lie. The myth that Iraqis hated Saddam more than they hated America was a lie. No suprise since the US and its Western allies put horrible sanctions on Iraq in the 90s, along with bombing the infastructure continously.

Contrary to the popular belief held in America, there is no central organization which is carrying out the insurgency. It is a collective will of the Iraqi populace to be rid of US imperialism.

The only solution to an illegal unilateral war is a multilateral solution which is legal. I say again, we need to consult the people who are effected most by an unstable Iraq, the Arabs and the Persians, and at large the rest of the Muslim world.

 

[[a-5]]

I, personally, am against the war for reasons of my own but the title is entirely a matter of personal opinion...I'm supposing that the day we pull out is the day Bush leaves office.

 

[hypewaders]

Very well said, DiamondHearts. You have encapsulated key understanding that Americans must accept in order to find a way out of this mess in Iraq. There has been considerable progress in American collective awareness in that direction, since the height of our national post-9-11 tantrum. I'm not expecting it to be so sudden, but I agree with you [a-5] that we will turn a corner when what's left of the Bush cabinet is entirely removed from office.

I trust that moderate Arabs and Muslims will one day recognize that the American public fell into the same cycle of revenge and over-reaction that oppressed and distressed people anywhere are not immune from. We unfortunately were at perhaps our greatest moment of national weakness, poised with a gun to Iraq's head, with a leadership screaming at us to "do it". We weren't left with much time to think about a situation most Americans scarcely knew anything about, before we were mobilized to invade a nation that did not acually threaten us, in spite of the lies we were bombarded with.

For those American still suffering under the spell of hubris (a spell insisting that America can find a military solution to a moral failure) it is no doubt a painful process of realization. But I'm reserving most of my pity for the belligerent thugs of American discourse until this shameful period is over. Right now, patriotic Americans have a duty to stand up to the stubborn belligerent rhetoric that is sowing the seeds of ouur destruction. When we've turned this around, I'l be ready to make nice. I do realize that America's failure has been an all-too-human one, a moral failing that many of our adversaries are also susceptible to. For now in America, we're in the midst of a war of ideas that I believe is about nothing less than the survival of our free society, that is threatened by ignorant hotheads who will wreck this great nation if we allow them to.

 

[Gently Passing]

If they want to be monarchies, let them. If they want a Shah (which I'm pretty sure Iranians don't) then let them.

Our freedom does NOT depend on everyone else in the known universe having a government exactly like ours.

...and if we are leading by example, they will more likely become Imperialistic dictatorships.

 

[madanthonywayne]

Don't worry. I have a good memory. So: Please consider and respond to my answers to your question- Or have you been only superficially trolling?

Oh, I'm not trolling at all. I believe everything I've said. What, specifically, do you predict would be the result of an early withdrawl v/s a continued presence?

My favored policy would be to train Iraqis and pull US forces out of areas as Iraqis assume control. Leaving when that process is done, however long that takes.

Am I correct in assuming your favored policy is to simply pull out asap and leave the Iraqis to their own devices?

 

[spidergoat]

So, we train inherently partisan Iraqis in combat, give them weapons, and when we leave they join one side or the other's death squads. This is already happening, we are training our own killers.

 

[hypewaders]

First, thanks for making sincere discussion.

madanthonywayne: "What, specifically, do you predict would be the result of an early withdrawl"

A mitigation of the direct products of our invasion and occupation: Misery, hatred and violence.

" v/s a continued presence?"

A continuing, compounding response identical to what has already manifested. The story of this intervention is a clear demonstration of cause and effect: American disruption has left Iraq in critical condition. Without removing the incompatibility (US occupation) Iraq will surely die.

"My favored policy would be to train Iraqis and pull US forces out of areas as Iraqis assume control."

That has proven unworkable (as spidergoat has pointed out) because Iraqi forces are not really our friends, and do not (in the present context) harbor loyalties trumping sectarianism. Americans will be violently evicted first, and the shape of Iraq will be violently worked out second. It's the brutal truth, and we should have all seen it coming.

"Am I correct in assuming your favored policy is to simply pull out asap and leave the Iraqis to their own devices?"

That's what we will ultimately be forced to do, no matter what we may profess or desire. The most productive thing we can do right now is to engage Iraq's neighbors in cooperatively working (independently of any public US kiss-of-death) out all possible security/containment arrangements.

It's not a pretty picture, but there it is.

 

[GeoffP]

and I thought most of the Jews came to live in Israel after 1948!!

Oy. Please don't be disingenuous. You're full well aware of the fact of dhimmitude prior to then, and of long date. Moreover, you seem to be dropping back to a demographic excuse: that is, that there were only a few Jews there, so oppressing them was not such a big deal. Surely you wouldn't excuse the even more vicious oppression of Jewish people in islamic countries after 1948 on the same demographic grounds?

Surely you cant tell me that Israel has done evrything for the good

No; but neither all for the bad, or even mostly, in my opinion. The Jewish immigrants to the region have been on the defensive from the beginning, all owing to the initial mistreatment of same on the basis of political islamic expression.

My weekend was pretty shite actually MR geoff, doing month end and shit like that, however my company's turnover is up about 300% on this time last year so shit aint that bad

Sorry to hear that. =(

 

[GeoffP]

I figured that term would piss you off. But I still say if you compare life under the Taliban or any Islamic extreemist type government, it's not too different from life in a fascist country.

Quite right. It is complete doubletalk to first say how wonderful such countries are - Iran, Pakistan, Afghanistan - and then simultaneously blame the Yanks for their evil despotism. It's one thing or the other.