And now Buckley has come around

[Richards 0]

Quote

Quote

At this stage right vs wrong is moot.

......



Again it is too late to debate the right or wrong of it.
Richards

ABSOLUTELY WRONG!

"Those who do not learn the lessons of history are doomed to repeat it."

This quagmire, voluntarily entered into by Bush and Blair, is a lesson of history.

That is true, however innapropriate in this context. Let me give you an example.
We use the fact that impared driving has caused deaths historically to create awareness of this so we can hopefully prevent future tragedies. Suppose I were to arrive at the scene of an accident where a drunk driver had just nailed another car and the victim in the other car was a single mother who was rapidly bleeding to death. Should I then stand by and wag my finger at the drunk driver all the while ignoring the dying woman because it is more important to ream him out as "those who forget history are doomed to repeat it" and "besides why should I do anything when it was he who drove drunk and therefor saving her life is his responsibility"? Common sense dictates that we prioritise, which in that case means rendering first aid, and being judgemental on the driver after we have saved the womans life. If she was your mother/wife/sister and I did nothing to help would you accept my saying "Hey, I was not the one that hit her so I had no obligation to help, it's that other guys fault"


Presently Iraq is bleeding to death. Later on when the international community has helped resolve the problem we may then have the luxury of reflecting upon it, and learning from any mistakes. Sitting here in judgement and letting this tragedy play out as we do nothing just because too many people have this fixation on seeing the US fail is morally contemptible.

Anyone can stand on the sidelines and laugh at those who try, and make mistakes. Character is about knowing when you should try to do your best to help in whatever limmitted way you can, regardles of whether or not it is "not our fault".

Richards

My biggest handicap is that sometimes the hole in the front of my head operates a tad bit faster than the grey matter contained within.

[ViperPilot 0]

Well the Vietnam numbers have already been disproven, but for better sake how about WWII? Both sides lost millions...so no, Iraq is NOT of epic proportions.

[Richards 0]

Perhaps a larger contingent of international forces might be usefull in two ways. One it will help a rather thinly stretched US military the opportunity to rest and regroup. Furthermore a more international mix might make it harder for the rabble rousers over there to try and present it as a domination rather than help. Again I think this is one of those moments where the international community needs to do a character check and be willing to do whatever it can to help.

It is also worth noting that during war, enemy leaders pay close attention to both the support of the international community, and the mood of the nation at home. When Al Qaeda leaders see the US unable to get support from the international community (even if it is merely moral support) this emboldens them. They also pay attention to US politics and when they see the opposition party (Democrats) playing up public misgivings about the war for political gain whilst promoting discontent amongst the American public, they realize that the war is one of resolve and since Al-Qaeda does not have an opposition party the are encouraged by feeling they will win on resolve. It is not unlike a child who plays two parents against each-other (admittedly not the best analogy). If the Al-Qaeda leadeship saw the Repiblicans and the Democrats supporting the war effort and saw the international community providing support for the war in any way they can the will feel significantly less emboldened.

I do not have a solution myself but, there needs to be some real dialogue as to how this can be resolved.

Richards

My biggest handicap is that sometimes the hole in the front of my head operates a tad bit faster than the grey matter contained within.

[shropshire 0]

Sorry, but I think that you have over-simplified what's happening in Iraq (but I'm no expert either)... The oposition to the US/UK presence can not be exclusively attributed to Al-Qaeda (it would be very interesting to know numbers as opposed to propaganda) - the situation would appear to be far more complex than that.

Also, suggesting the opposition to a foreign invasion are rabble rousers, is a bit rich.. If anyone invade your country, would you just sit back and take it?

.

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[sundevil777 102]

Quote

If anyone invade your country, would you just sit back and take it?

At first, we were greeted as liberators. Is it so hard to remember?

People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

[shropshire 0]

by who... certainly not everyone..... the one's who had family and friends killed.... the ones who had their doors kicked in..... the ones who's streets, hospitals, schools, water treatment or power plants wheer bombed.....etc....etc.... etc...
Hey but dont worry ... the rock being thrown are just in jest

Walmart must be doing a roaring trade on Rose coloured sun-glasses

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[kallend 2,106]

Quote

Well the Vietnam numbers have already been disproven, but for better sake how about WWII? Both sides lost millions...so no, Iraq is NOT of epic proportions.

Neither is Hurricane Katrina a natural disaster by that logic. The Boxing Day Tsunami was so much worse, Katrina just doesn't count.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 2,106]

Quote

Quote

If anyone invade your country, would you just sit back and take it?

At first, we were greeted as liberators. Is it so hard to remember?

"Quisling" is not a uniquely Norwegian concept.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 2,106]

Quote

Perhaps a larger contingent of international forces might be usefull in two ways.

Ha ha, after we pissed all over our allies. (remember "Freedom Fries"?).

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Samurai136 0]

Quote

Let me give you an example.
"those who forget history are doomed to repeat it" and "besides why should I do anything when it was he who drove drunk and therefor saving her life is his responsibility"?

This is why analogies make for bad argument. You have totally missed the point and it poorly represents your own points.

If we extend your analogy, The Bush Administration is the drunk driver. No one would expect the "drunk driver" to be capable of rendering aid to a sitiuation they screwed up on their own.

Just like Vietnam, the problem in Iraq is local politics. This is what Prof. Kallend is referring to by "the consequences of forgotten history".

Your analogy also serves to prove the point that local problems need local solutions not international intervention.

"Buttons aren't toys." - Trillian
Ken

[rasmack 0]

Quote

"Quisling" is not a uniquely Norwegian concept.

Ahh, a man with some knowledge of history. I tip my hat to you sir.

HF #682, Team Dirty Sanchez #227
“I simply hate, detest, loathe, despise, and abhor redundancy.”
- Not quite Oscar Wilde...

[Richards 0]

Quote

Quote

Perhaps a larger contingent of international forces might be usefull in two ways.

Ha ha, after we pissed all over our allies. (remember "Freedom Fries"?).

I am one of your allies. I am Canadian. I think that the "Freedom fries" incident and other similar incedents were a long due response by the average American, to the constant barrage of Anti-American nonsense they are subjected to. A great deal of this nonsense came from France, Germany and yes Canada. I have on numerous occasion witnessed Americans in my country being treated poorly by my fellow citizen because they were Americans, and for the record I did speak up. If the entire world condemned Canada regardless of what we did or didn't do I would likely develop a "screw you " attitude to everyone else also. Do not forget that immediately after Sept 11 many of your so called allies immediately started blaming it on US foreign policy. Whatever anyones opinion on US foreign policy it takes a certain degree of heartlessnes to make comments like that immediately after such a tragedy. Again when you have tried to gain support in the UN, most of your motions were blocked just because they were forwarded by the US. At some point the average US citizen has a breaking point and will start to snap back.

Regardles of anyones political position, the US has done far more good with it's foreign policy than it has bad, and many of us benefit greatly from the fact that the US is willing to play world police, for example;

South Korea would be owned by Kim Jong Il

Kuwait would belong to Saddam

Croats would still be getting slaughtered by Serbs while the UN twiddled it's thumbs pretending they were making a difference (while finding some way to blame this on the US)

Canada would need a real army...

...etc.

While the rest of the western world may noy see eye to eye with the US position they should at least try to work out some sort of agreement whereby they can get over old petty greivances and think/act progressively. They should also try to remind themselves that while they were offended by the "freedom fries" incedent, they have taken their fair share of potshots at America.

Cheers,

Richards

My biggest handicap is that sometimes the hole in the front of my head operates a tad bit faster than the grey matter contained within.

[sundevil777 102]

Quote

Quote

Quote

If anyone invade your country, would you just sit back and take it?

At first, we were greeted as liberators. Is it so hard to remember?

"Quisling" is not a uniquely Norwegian concept.

They did greet us as liberators. You compare those people celebrating their liberation from tyranny to Quisling? I don't see the comparison, Hitler never wanted to liberate a country from a tyrannical ruler to become self governed in freedom. He just wanted to expand his empire. Big difference, I think.

Don't you remember all the people that lined the streets as the American troops drove through, or all the people quite willing to hit the pictures and statues of SH with their shoes (a big insult for them)?

SH didn't comply with the terms of the '92 cease fire agreement, and kept shooting at our planes. Some would not have become involved in the first gulf war because Kuwait's govt isn't a democracy. Do you think the first gulf war was justified? I think it was, but the elder Bush was wrong to allow SH to put down the Kurdish uprising with his helicopters, which were still allowed to fly by the agreement. I think he should have ordered the helicopters shot down anyway.

People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

[Richards 0]

Quote

Quote

Let me give you an example.
"those who forget history are doomed to repeat it" and "besides why should I do anything when it was he who drove drunk and therefor saving her life is his responsibility"?

This is why analogies make for bad argument. You have totally missed the point and it poorly represents your own points.***



I have not missed the point at all. I see it quite clearly but my point which you are not seeing is that we already missed the ball on the fact that it was a local problem. We have now involved ourselves and like it or not we have a responsibility. Merely firing one liners without a solution to a problem that we have already involved ourselves in is counterproductive.

If we extend your analogy, The Bush Administration is the drunk driver. No one would expect the "drunk driver" to be capable of rendering aid to a sitiuation they screwed up on their own.

Quote

Why not?

Just like Vietnam, the problem in Iraq is local politics. This is what Prof. Kallend is referring to by "the consequences of forgotten history".

Your analogy also serves to prove the point that local problems need local solutions not international intervention.

***

Agin this would be a great point before the invasion but in the absense of a time machine, we cannot apply it retroactively, nor would it be sensible to focus on future lessons learned when the existing problem has not been resolved. After the invasion the existing government was removed and anarchy has started to reign. Therefore we in the west already intervened and the problem is no longer a purely local problem, it is one that is to some degree brought on by our actions. Intervention (which has already happened and can't be reversed) has created a new problem and now we need to look at how to minimize the effects of this intervention. A complete pullout leaves them not in the same situation we found them in but in a worse one of our creation. I realize the importance of expediting the process of Iraqi self determination but we have altered an infrastructure that they depended on and that does to some extent make us responsible for helping rebuild.

I am not trying to be difficult here but I can't help but feel that there is too much emphasis on assigning blame and none on solving the problem. I am certainly not claiming to have the solution, I am merely saying that it is time for cooler heads to cooperate and try to find one.

Richards

My biggest handicap is that sometimes the hole in the front of my head operates a tad bit faster than the grey matter contained within.

[shropshire 0]

Good job the US marines were there to topple SH's statute with their recovery crane and then the close cropped picture 'implied' that the jubilant Iraqis did it...

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[Richards 0]

Quote

Sorry, but I think that you have over-simplified what's happening in Iraq (but I'm no expert either)... The oposition to the US/UK presence can not be exclusively attributed to Al-Qaeda (it would be very interesting to know numbers as opposed to propaganda) - the situation would appear to be far more complex than that.

Also, suggesting the opposition to a foreign invasion are rabble rousers, is a bit rich.. If anyone invade your country, would you just sit back and take it?

.

OK fair enough. I realize that my point is over simplified, but the underlying reasoning is valid. As I have never been over there I can only surmise what is happenning by what I see in the news (admittedly an imperfect source) but it seems that many non-Iraqis are showing up to rally insurrections against the US troops. It is these elements that I refer to as rabble rousers.

I can realize that many Iraqis are enraged by the invasion and I can see why many would be angry but surely there must be soem elements over there who would like to make the best of this and try to utilize the American presence to rebuild. The sooner Iraq is stabilized the sooner foreign troops can be pulled out. I cannot imagine that the average Iraqi is that different from the average American/Canadian in that they would rather allow a complete power vacuum that would result in a competition amongst warlords or a Taliban style government. The rabble rousers are the ones who want to see the US pull out before Iraq is capable of policing itself.

Hypothetically if the US invaded Canada, and as a result several armed gunment were trying to wreak havok amongst our streets; regardless of how I felt about it I would not want to see the Marines pull out untill our own forces and government were capable of providing security.

Richards

My biggest handicap is that sometimes the hole in the front of my head operates a tad bit faster than the grey matter contained within.

[shropshire 0]

I think that I can see the point that you're trying to make but it's easy for us, we're not clouded by the fact that foriegners are in our country.... without invitation (and on really dodgy precept)... Now, I probably wouldn't be thinking too clearly either.... Oh they're here to help me (yeah right)

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[ViperPilot 0]

Quote

Neither is Hurricane Katrina a natural disaster by that logic.

Good job Kallend, you're learning! No, Katrina was not some epic disaster. People who says, "this is our sunami" are a bunch of fucking idiots and need to pull their heads out of their asses. Katrina was nothing compared to what other parts of the world have suffered, including in recent time.

[Richards 0]

Quote

I think that I can see the point that you're trying to make but it's easy for us, we're not clouded by the fact that foriegners are in our country.... without invitation (and on really dodgy precept)... Now, I probably wouldn't be thinking too clearly either.... Oh they're here to help me (yeah right)

I see your point and respect your opinion. I think we both agree that there is no simple answer to this. It is far more complex than that. Interesting debate though.

Richards

My biggest handicap is that sometimes the hole in the front of my head operates a tad bit faster than the grey matter contained within.

[shropshire 0]

cheers

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[Samurai136 0]

Quote

Agin this would be a great point before the invasion but in the absense of a time machine, we cannot apply it retroactively, nor would it be sensible to focus on future lessons learned when the existing problem has not been resolved

False. Non-intervention and state sovereignty are well established concepts in international relations for hundreds of years.

Einstein's definition of insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

Intervention has not resulted in a peaceful democartic Iraq. I'm uncertain why any reasonable person would expect different results by continued US presence in Iraq.

"Buttons aren't toys." - Trillian
Ken

[Richards 0]

Quote

Quote

Agin this would be a great point before the invasion but in the absense of a time machine, we cannot apply it retroactively, nor would it be sensible to focus on future lessons learned when the existing problem has not been resolved

False. Non-intervention and state sovereignty are well established concepts in international relations for hundreds of years.

Einstein's definition of insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

Intervention has not resulted in a peaceful democartic Iraq. I'm uncertain why any reasonable person would expect different results by continued US presence in Iraq.

I am not sure that you and I are debating the same issue. My points do not pertain to semantics or definitions, nor do they suggest what should have been done so much as what can be done now. I am interested in hearing whatever solutions we can come up with for Iraq now (not what should have been done). Do you have a constructive suggestion for the present situation?

Richards

My biggest handicap is that sometimes the hole in the front of my head operates a tad bit faster than the grey matter contained within.

[Samurai136 0]

Billvon already summed it up here.

There are no easy answers. All of them involve the loss of human life. Since it is already a granted point that the US troops should not have been in Iraq. We should correct that mistake first and allow the local politics to resolve themselves. Bring the US troops home.

"Buttons aren't toys." - Trillian
Ken

[kallend 2,106]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Perhaps a larger contingent of international forces might be usefull in two ways.

Ha ha, after we pissed all over our allies. (remember "Freedom Fries"?).

I am one of your allies. I am Canadian. I think that the "Freedom fries" incident and other similar incedents were a long due response by the average American, to the constant barrage of Anti-American nonsense they are subjected to. A great deal of this nonsense came from France, Germany and yes Canada. I have on numerous occasion witnessed Americans in my country being treated poorly by my fellow citizen because they were Americans, and for the record I did speak up. If the entire world condemned Canada regardless of what we did or didn't do I would likely develop a "screw you " attitude to everyone else also. Do not forget that immediately after Sept 11 many of your so called allies immediately started blaming it on US foreign policy.
Richards

That is absolutely untrue. You have already expressed a disdain for history and your attitude shows.


And on behalf of the American people, I thank the world for its outpouring of support. America will never forget the sounds of our National Anthem playing at Buckingham Palace, on the streets of Paris, and at Berlin's Brandenburg Gate.

We will not forget South Korean children gathering to pray outside our embassy in Seoul, or the prayers of sympathy offered at a mosque in Cairo. We will not forget moments of silence and days of mourning in Australia and Africa and Latin America.
George W. Bush, 9/20/2001


The civilized world is rallying to America's side.
George W. Bush, 9/20/2001


The North Atlantic Council met tonight to express its solidarity with the United States of America at this moment of great tragedy and mourning. Our deepest sympathy lies with the victims, their families and all Americans. The NATO nations unanimously condemn these barbaric acts committed against a NATO member state. The mindless slaughter of so many innocent civilians is an unacceptable act of violence without precedent in the modern era. It underscores the urgency of intensifying the battle against terrorism, a battle that the NATO countries - indeed all civilised nations - must win. All Allies stand united in their determination to combat this scourge.

At this critical moment, the United States can rely on its 18 Allies in North America and Europe for assistance and support. NATO solidarity remains the essence of our Alliance. Our message to the people of the United States is that we are with you. Our message to those who perpetrated these unspeakable crimes is equally clear: you will not get away with it.

The North Atlantic Council, 9/11/2001

The overwhelming majority of allies including all of NATO declared total solidarity with the US after 9/11 and, supported the overthrow of the Taliban. The divergence followed the Bush/Blair lies and subsequent misadventures in Iraq, which has been a self-imposed clusterfuck by the US/UK.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Richards 0]

***We should correct that mistake first and allow the local politics to resolve themselves. Bring the US troops home.