News from the Colonies - America's War in Iraq

[spidergoat]

Hey you liberals out there, how's this for left-wing "intellectualism":

Not very intellectual in my opinion. Iraq is technically already under Islamic law, it's in the constitution. Although they are trying for a western style Democracy, the fact that all laws are subject to Islam leaves too big an opening for Theocracy. This kind of Democracy is doomed to fail. Thank the Lard the US has constitutional protections against such a thing.

What Hypewaders' Kool Aid Drinkers' Diatribe makes abundantly clear is that the Left's claim of intellectual superiority is terribly misplaced.

Partisanship doesn't automatically confer intelligence. Intelligence doesn't automatically translate into laws that favor the average person.

1. The US doesn't "give Iraq democracy." We've already done that, and Israel wasn't involved in it.

This is what we attempted. What will result will certainly be something different. What the Cons don't understand is the conditions that favor a working Democratic state. That means an educated middle class. Con economic policies lead to the same conditions that caused the early American colonists to rebel against the British Empire. I too am skeptical of any direct control of the Iraq policy by Israel. Rather there are US Cons sympathetic to the most despicable right-wingers in Israel.

2. Liberals love to side with the terrorists. Why does the Left despise democracy and support terrorism all the time? Democrats adore Fidel Castro, and crap on Israel. Why aren't more liberals moving to Habana? ole!

I guess you aren't one of those intellectual types, huh? No matter. It has always been US policy to support Democracy. What we are against is Corporatocracy, war profiteering, redistribution of wealth, and distraction by unreasonable fear while Democracy is being eroded at home.

3. Operation Enduring Freedom is the name of the military effort. Get a clue.

Operation Iraqi Liberation (OIL) was the original title wasn't it? Does that count as a clue?

4. Since Hypewaders thinks the Afghan people, and to be sure, even the Iraqi people, were better off under the terrorists, he has to explain Hussein's murder of "five to seven million Iraqis, the majority of them Shiites." (National Geographic Magazine, June 2004, page 28)

Who are they under now if not their own native terrorists? Besides, all wars are not created equal. You are offering a false choice, a simplistic black and white model that can satisfy only those who wish the world were so.

How about those Taliban beating women and treating them like cattle, huh!
That was much more like it, to hear Democrats talk. Hell, the Taliban treated their women about like Bill Clinton does. And those feminists (sic) sure aren't complaining. After all, Bubba is an "alpha male."

"to hear the Democrats talk"
Can you give an example of an elected Democrat saying that Aghanistan would be better off under the Taliban? While you're working on that, consider that Afghani society is just as brutally patriarchal as it was before we invaded. My man Bill may be a lady's man, but somehow I think Amsterdam would be little more to his liking than Kabul. Aslo, the Taliban have regrouped and retaken much of their former territory, preventing girls from going to school under threat of murder. I guess we are fighting them over there (Iraq), so we don't have to bother fighting them over here (Afghanistan).

 

[Tiassa]

The current Get Your War On.

What do you do, indeed?

 

[S.A.M.]

The current Get Your War On.

What do you do, indeed?

The mind boggles.

 

[hypewaders]

The thing that makes my head hurt is more Americans think Saddam caused 9/11 than approve of Bush's job performance. I mean, what the fuck do you do with a piece of data like that?

You get the truth out as much as you can, while there is still time, and before the next crisis provides perfect conditions for more functional fascists to take power.

 

[Fugu-dono]

Expect another Vietnam-like result sooner or later IMO. Just leave the damn place to themselves. If the various groups in Iraq want to wipe each other out who cares... Scared the oil will be forever out of US grasp or something hence having to maintain presence there?

Seriously the only interest I can see the US remaining is to establish a stable US friendly government for their own benefit. Secondly to continues presence in the middle east area with the excuse of war on terror. Next they're throw some consipiracy that Iran and/or some other nations with important resources in that area are plotting against them (which somehow gets interpreted that the threat to US is against every damn first-world nation by the media). Ah I see a trend here. First it's Afghanistan to have backdoor presence to China as well as another vantage on Russia and now this crap.

I hate terrorists as much as the next man but seriously any excuse to have military presence. Then again I remember that moron Bush slipped out the word crusade awhile back. Hmmm!?... Perhaps they are more sly than we take them to be and are continuing their presence for another purpose of pissing the Islamic nations off to provoke a full-scale war on the whole area.

 

[hypewaders]

Although I thought the Tom&Jerry twist superfluous, I found this article by Kathy Kelly unusually informative. If one cannot get down to this level of personal detail, one cannot begin to understand the implications of current events.

 

[Tiassa]

I don't think the T&J twist is superfluous; it portrays a connection 'twixt diverse peoples: we like mindless violence as long as it isn't real. (Insert appropriate commentary as needed.)

One thing that did strike me, though, from the article:

“Sometimes Tom wins and sometimes Jerry, and sometimes they both win, especially if they team up against an enemy,” a young Iraqi woman told me. “You love them both. It’s a bit like fights between brothers and sisters.” (Kelly)​

Did Tom ever win exclusively? I don't think I've ever seen that episode.

 

[juju]

how do you start a thread? HELP!!

 

[Tiassa]

Let's say you want to start one in World Events. Go to the forum. Now, start from the top of the screen. First, there is the banner with the Sciforums logo. Then there is a gray bar with site links: Encyclopedia, User CP, FAQ, &c. Immediately below this, on the left, is a button that says "New Thread". Click that.

 

[S.A.M.]

Not to be too cynical, but I wonder how much the emerging market crisis has to do with it. Americans are going to need international goodwill to get through this one.

 

[hypewaders]

oops. Were you responding to this up here ^ when I yanked it Sam? Here it is again:


Watching Real Time with Bill Maher illustrates how the Iraq debate in the USA has evolved. Americans really are getting increasingly fed up with this war and its associated lies, and Tim Robbins well articulates that anger.

Video Link​

 

[S.A.M.]

:spank:

 

[hypewaders]

:fright: :bawl:

 

[Mr. G]

Americans really are getting increasingly fed up with this war and its associated lies, and Tim Robbins well articulates that anger.

No, they're not. Really.

Timmy only presumes to speak for his fellow children.

It's adults who're getting it done -- sans tantrums.

Children don't enlist, they do little league -- maybe.

 

[S.A.M.]

No, they're not. Really.

Timmy only presumes to speak for his fellow children.

It's adults who're getting it done.

Perhaps a reality check is in order

 

[Mr. G]

Perhaps a reality check is in order

Your's came back NSF.

 

[S.A.M.]

Your's came back NSF.

Was it in dollars?

 

[Mr. G]

Was it in dollars?

No. Crayons.

 

[Tiassa]

Signs of progress, I'm sure

Source: WSWS.org
Link: http://www.wsws.org/articles/2007/nov2007/iraq-n07.shtml
Title: "US troop deaths in Iraq set yearly record", by Shannon Jones
Date: November 7, 2007

Not exactly shocking. Not unexpected, in fact. But let's at least hope we're getting our ... uh ... investment's worth°:

The toll of US soldiers killed in Iraq reached 853 this week, making 2007 the deadliest year for US forces since the 2003 invasion. A total of 3,856 US troops have died during the occupation of the Persian Gulf state. Forces of US coalition allies have suffered another 297 deaths.

(Jones)

It's a vain hope, I realize. Especially since nobody's really sure what, exactly, we're pouring such resources° into.
____________________

Notes:

° our investment's worth - I could probably care less about the money, but I'm sick of wasting human beings on this imperial crusade.

° resources - Again, human resources. Governments are apt to waste money, no matter what better uses I might think of. But this wasting of human life, respect, and dignity must stop. Admittedly, this cannot happen overnight. It would be nice, however, if Bushdick, inc. could put some effort into at least giving the mere appearance that our investment of resources is going toward something more than perpetual futility and imperial wet dreams.

 

[Tiassa]

He wasn't really trying to kill himself

Terrorists continue defamation campaign against U.S.
Latest incident sees Algerian slash throat ... with fingernail

An inmate at the US detention centre in Guantanamo Bay slashed his throat with a sharpened fingernail, US officials have confirmed.
The prisoner, described by his lawyer as an Algerian held for six years, required several stitches and spent a week under psychiatric observation.

US officials characterised the incident as an act of "self-harm" rather than a suicide attempt.

(BBC News)

You know, the thought of some Algerian goth cutter is almost enough to make this war humorous.

US Navy Cmdr Andrew Haynes said there was "an impressive effusion of blood" but the prisoner was treated by guards and taken to the prison clinic.

Officials would give no details of the man but lawyer Zachary Katznelson said the inmate had been held without charge for nearly six years.

Cmdr Haynes said "self-harm" incidents were a tactic to discredit US forces.

(ibid)

I wonder if Commander Haynes is a God-fearing man? He is going to Hell for his role in this evil farce.