Tweet
As for "revisionism," I was saying well before the election that this was the point of the boycott. Hell, there isn't any other logical point to the boycott.
-
"Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. "
-Bokonon -
I will give you a chance to edit that to some sort of coherent statement with meaning. It is just a little to easy to pick on that and you normally do better.
I don't really want to play grammar pedant with you. You can figure it out for yourself."Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. "
-BokononComment
-
The answer is easier than that, there is no logical point of the boycott.Hell, there isn't any other logical point to the boycott.
Grammer be damned, that line doesn't mean anything.I don't really want to play grammar pedant with you
Thread is about US and insurgents talking about the guerrillas hanging up the towel, then morphed into why the insurgents are talking at all, I give a reason, you ask how this is possible, a give examples. Seems totally relevent to me.There's a rule about bringing up non-sequiters completely irrelevent to what you're quoting."The DPRK is still in a state of war with the U.S. It's called a black out." - Che explaining why orbital nightime pictures of NK show few lights. Seriously.Comment
-
The answer is easier than that, there is no logical point of the boycott.
Seeing as how it helps to sustain the insurgency, that's nonsense.
Grammer be damned, that line doesn't mean anything.
Again, due to the influence of Chalabi and other folks that refused to compromise with the Ba'athists, the insurgents haven't had the opportunity to have these sorts of talks with us until recently.
Thread is about US and insurgents talking about the guerrillas hanging up the towel, then morphed into why the insurgents are talking at all, I give a reason, you ask how this is possible, a give examples. Seems totally relevent to me.
Let's recap. You were asserting that the insurgents shot themselves in the foot militarily and politically with the boycott. I demonstrated why not, namely that the boycott was the only way that the insurgency could be sustained.
Then you bring nonsense about long-term events which you somehow have a handle on (it's amusing that you know what will happen in Iraq for the next "few decades"), totally irrelevent to the insurgents' political and military status in the current war. That was a nonsequiter."Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. "
-BokononComment
-
Negative, I said they lost militarily with the insurgency, and lost politically with the boycott. Both are correct. What goal has the insurgency acheived, what goal has the boycott acheived? Endless perpetualtion of the insurgency is not the goal of either. It is to undermine the emerging government and allow for an artificial Sunni hold on power, and it has failed miserably.militarily and politically"The DPRK is still in a state of war with the U.S. It's called a black out." - Che explaining why orbital nightime pictures of NK show few lights. Seriously.Comment
-
Ramo, Patroklos is an idealogue. He will never sway from his view, no matter what evidence you throw in front of him.Comment
-
Negative, I said they lost militarily with the insurgency, and lost politically with the boycott. Both are correct. What goal has the insurgency acheived, what goal has the boycott acheived? Endless perpetualtion of the insurgency is not the goal of either. It is to undermine the emerging government and allow for an artificial Sunni hold on power, and it has failed miserably.
The insurgents have likely nullified the effect of the election in terms of decreasing popular support for the insurgency through the boycott. That means they have not had their asses handed to them politically.
Militarily, they're able to sustain their violence, and even killed 55 people on Saturday. Likewise, militarily.
They haven't won, but they haven't "lost" by any reasonable measure. They could go on for years if they want to."Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. "
-BokononComment
-
Ain't that how the Brits did it in Scotland?Originally posted by Oerdin
It would be nice if they could whittle away the insurgency with a combination of diplomacy and military action. Time will tell if that will happen.
"What did you learn in school today, dear little boy of mine?
I learned our government must be strong. It's always right and never wrong,.....that's what I learned in school."
--- Tom Paxton song ('63)Comment
-
Fair enough on some counts, but the boycott was an attempt to make the elected government illegitimate, it failed.They haven't won, but they haven't "lost" by any reasonable measure. They could go on for years if they want to.
I don't think either of us have provided any actual evidence Crack, back to the kiddie pool with you.Ramo, Patroklos is an idealogue. He will never sway from his view, no matter what evidence you throw in front of him."The DPRK is still in a state of war with the U.S. It's called a black out." - Che explaining why orbital nightime pictures of NK show few lights. Seriously.Comment
-
Fair enough on some counts, but the boycott was an attempt to make the elected government illegitimate, it failed.
It's illegitimate in the minds of Sunni Arabs (see the AMS, for instance), which was their aim."Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. "
-BokononComment
-
Originally posted by Patroklos
I don't think either of us have provided any actual evidence Crack, back to the kiddie pool with you.
I've read many of your arguments in the past. They're high on opinion, low on substance. This one is no different.Comment
-
As if the boycott changed that in any way. Of course the Sunni's see it as illigitimate, they have no way of dominating the country through this system.t's illegitimate in the minds of Sunni Arabs (see the AMS, for instance), which was their aim.
I can't really say anything bad about your arguments becuase you don't present any, just sad excuses for snide comments that, sadly, I think you might consider clever.I've read many of your arguments in the past. They're high on opinion, low on substance. This one is no different.
Now like I said, back to the shallow end with you, I think your troll buddies Sava and Tass need help putting on their swimming wings."The DPRK is still in a state of war with the U.S. It's called a black out." - Che explaining why orbital nightime pictures of NK show few lights. Seriously.Comment
-
That was the main goal of the election boycott and the threats to "fill the streets with the blood of voters". The insurgents knew they'd pull in about 10%-15% of the vote so why play a game you're going to lose?Originally posted by Patroklos
Fair enough on some counts, but the boycott was an attempt to make the elected government illegitimate, it failed.
Still, I think you are over playing the importance of the recent election since another election is going to be held in a year. The interum government's job is to write a perminent constitution to replace the one the US/UK wrote, register more political parties, use the recent census data to draw election districts, and hold a vote for a perminent government by next January.Try http://wordforge.net/index.php for discussion and debate.Comment
-
As if the boycott changed that in any way. Of course the Sunni's see it as illigitimate, they have no way of dominating the country through this system.
Actually, the election would've been seen as far more legitimate if Sunni Arab representation were proportional to their population. If their interests were well-represented in the gov't, that would've dealt the insurgency a major blow. There's still a chance of that happening given the discretion of the national assembly in forming a gov't and Constitution, but I don't see it as all that likely."Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. "
-BokononComment
-
That is the problem with the Sunni, they know they will forever be the minority in anything resembling an honest election. They don't want proportional representation, they want extra.
If they truly wanted proportional rep, they just had to vote."The DPRK is still in a state of war with the U.S. It's called a black out." - Che explaining why orbital nightime pictures of NK show few lights. Seriously.Comment
Comment