Iraqi Transfer of Power

[MrFun]

As for equating all liberals with having this sadistic desire for failure in Iraq . . . . .

the purpose of criticism is not to undermine the war effort (unless it really is the war itself that you oppose) but to protest bad policy decisions and to advocate for other possibly better decisions.

[Ted Striker]

Originally posted by MrFun


Well, if we're talking about disrespect for the soldiers over in Iraq, I sure hope you denounced that public dinner appearance by President Bush when he made distasteful jokes about our war effort in Iraq.

And while we're talking about the disrespect for soldiers in Iraq, I sure hope that you are angry with President Bush AND candidate Kerry for using the efforts of American soldiers in Iraq for their own political campaigns.

And while we're talking about disrespect for soldiers in Iraq, I am hoping that you were angry the way Republicans tried to tar and villify Kerry and McCain in order to try to undermine the respect they have as Vietnam War veterans.

While we're talking about disrespect for soldiers in Iraq, I will feel better if you're denouncing the soldiers who have committed war crimes over in Iraq, thus undermining the patriotic, brave duty of the majority of our other soldiers who are doing the best job that they can do.



Let's face it -- disrespect towards our soldiers is not dependent on what political ideology you adhere to, or what political party you adhere to.

And as far as any extreme, worshipful bias I have for Democrats -- there are past Democratic presidents whose policies I have detested (Clinton being last one).



Anything else you want to share?

You're disrespecting Lincoln now with this one-upmanship stupid list.

[MrFun]

nope -- just pointing out that disrespect for our soldiers comes from all directions and from individuals in all groups of people

[Dr Strangelove]

Re: Iraqi Transfer of Power

Originally posted by Giancarlo
I was shocked that nobody got to this before...

.... and I'm shocked to find gambling going on here in "Rick's American Cafe"!

No one really expects the interim government to succeed, or even to survive for very long. The gendarms will be by presently to close the place down right after the captain collects his winnings.

It's the law of FUBAR.

[Lawrence of Arabia]

hahahHAHHHaha ted you got OWNED OWNED OWNED OWNED OWNED. you got worked harder than mexican migrant workers in a fruit farm.

same with you lincoln.

[Ted Striker]

not really

[Ted Striker]

vedä käteen!

[Verto]

English

[Dinner]

Originally posted by GePap
yes- speically compared to every single anchor in Fox, like Cavuto.

I'll admite that Fox's editorials are very one sided but Fox also clearly labels all of its editorials. The Big Three networks spent years not doing that. They developed touchy feel shows which were entirely editorials disguised as news.

[Ramo]

Ok, i think we have the disconnect. Martial law != police state. There are lots of measure that could be implemented as martial law, and they could be implemented in limited areas. I dont see anyone suggesting a "police state"

They're both extraordinary restrictions of civil liberties. The main difference that is that martial law has a temporary connotation (and of course a martial connotation), but I'm not interested in a semantics debate.

LOTM Allawis party is built from men who LEFT the Baathists. Who were plotting to overthrow the Baathists. Look, anyone who held a high position in the army or govt was a member of the Baath. You didnt have a choice. It was look being a member of the CPSU. It didnt necessarily mean real ideological commitment.

Funny how they didn't join the INC or SCIRI or the ICP or the dozens of other exile groups. Why the INA? If there's no ideological connection between these ex-Ba'athist military officers, why would they flock to the INA? And why would everyone else go to the other parties? And again, if you look at the sorts of connections the INA has with other Arab parties, the ones with Ba'athist parties are the strongest. Why has Allawi and the INA been pushing for a police state ever since the occupation started?

And remember, Saddam organized a coup against the former Ba'ath leadership of Iraq. So does that make Saddam a non-Ba'athist, or the previous regime non-Ba'athist?

I'm not suggesting that every ex-Ba'athist has a Ba'athist ideology, merely that if you've got a party that's made up of ex-Ba'athist officers, that has connections with other Ba'athist parties, that has been advocating a very strong security apparatus with secret police and the works, well, if it looks like a duck and sounds like a duck...

Hes got a coalition government, with Jaafari as VP, a Kurd as Deputy PM for security etc. I dont see the political alignment there for Allawi to pull off a coup and become leader for life, as you seem to imply.

All the more reason for Allawi to well, assert himself. And Allawi has his own man in interior.

And he need not political allignment (as the right loves to point out in the Iraq-al-Qaeda threads), just temporary mutual self-interest. If a delay in elections could allow the Kurds to not have their sovereignty taken away by the likely Shia gov't, perhaps they'd be willing to make a temporary alliance. Anyways, it's all speculation. I'm just saying, there's no way in hell I'm going to trust this man.

[Ted Striker]

good point Oerdin

[Alexander's Horse]

You get the impression Bremer kept the motor running at the handover

[Dinner]

LotM: You are one of the few people in this thread who are making any sense.

Based upon my personal experiences of being here in Iraq and having daily interactions with the Iraqi people on this subject I'd say security is there number one concern. Everyone knew that already but did you know how popular Alewi's hit at martial law was? The IRaqi people want security while being ruled by an Iraqi. That's way they put up with 40 years of dictators because those dictators could deal with the radical factions in a manner the radical factions could understand (mean with over welling force).

The west just doesn't have the will or the desire to do what is necisary to restore order; that is mass arrests, martial law, and group punishment. A lot of that has to do with us not wanting to look or act like Saddam, however, I see no other way out of this situation except perhaphes a long slow decline in the conflict. Such a slow decline would be unpresidented in the history of the Arab world though. The history of the Arab world is that the strong dominate the weak and if those in charge don't then the opposition thinks they're weak and a civil war breaks out.

The Arab world is not the west. There ideas of right and wrong are totally different. That's why we've seen so much repression and no real democracy.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Lincoln
The American hating left is like a gnat. People are trying to work and do a good thing and they sit on the sidelines picking every effort to pieces to satisfy some inner need, I suppose, to say "I told you so". Why don't you know-it alls go lend a hand to the people you constantly condemn for doing what you don't have the guts to do?

A few sound bites thrown together haphazardly. Even Fezzie can do better.

[MrFun]

UR -- I think it's because it's been awhile since Lincoln got laid?