The Iraq Thread

[Pukko 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (IsthatyouJohnWayne @ 10 May 2003,23:32)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">PitViper- First, im glad you injected some topical material into this thread (seemed to be going downhill)

but that  weekly standard article, whilst interesting as an alternative viewpoint is a little on the silly side. It refutes many of the (supposed) claims made by the major news agencies whilst offering scant amounts of actual new evidence. One of its main contentions seems to be that  news agencies are now reporting much more bad news than good news! What has the world come to!

[snip]

Bush may be dumb, the administration is not.

There is no evil plot/hidden conspiracy , there are a set of policies strongly influenced by a Project.

The Project for a New American Century.

This seems to be the prime source of many of the post spt.11 Bush administration foreign and defense policies. It also seems to be the ideological and intellectual foundation of the 'Bush Doctrine'.<span id='postcolor'>

Guess what I found on the Mein Kampf IIâ„¢ website:

http://www.newamericancentury.org/iraq-050503.htm

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">In many ways it seems to be all about preserving the status quo or an idealised version of the status quo for America in as much as is possible by eliminating threats to 'stability' and 'order'. By cementing 'what is' in terms of current American power,influence or conditions favourable to America TBA may be blocking off 'what could be' for the future both bad and good.<span id='postcolor'>

Very good point...

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">Just amazingly short sighted, and totally ignoring the possibilities for 'blowback'.  It's this lack of  foresight that brought about guys like Osama Bin Ladin.  How many new terrorists will this current administration spawn?<span id='postcolor'>

Unfortionally I think TBA really wants some terrorists to be around. Its good for business, so to say   . An external enemy to unite the Americans, plenty of reason to start wars anywhere by claiming terrorist contacts, and latsly but not least - gives reason to implement a "1984" society - the power hungry's wettest dream...

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Pukko @ 09 May 2003,18:15)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Longinius @ 09 May 2003,14<!--emo&)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">What TBA are actually doing is a classic. If you want to pull something off, do it in broad daylight in plain view of the public and most people expect it to be legite. Otherwise you wouldnt be doing it in public.

Thats how many succesful robberies and break-ins have been carried out.

So just because its obvious doesnt mean its OK.<span id='postcolor'>

Its very likely in big parts so. Part of it is also the fashinating (and scary) phenomenon that I have noticed, that there only takes a few symbolic things to make it all look like its 'purely on the good side'. One concrete (but maybe poor) example is for example the Israel/Palestine conflict, where the discourse surrounding  modern tanks etc. in Israeli raids makes it easy to think 'well, they are using modern hightech equipment - they have to be the good'.<span id='postcolor'>

I got a better example more in line with Longinius: To park a stolen policecar outside the shop/house robbed.

[Akira 0]

On the lighter side...

Do You Want To Bomb Iran?

[Albert Schweitzer 10]

Frustrated, U.S. Arms Team to Leave Iraq

Task Force Unable To Find Any Weapons

By Barton Gellman

Washington Post Staff Writer

Sunday, May 11, 2003

Read the article

[Jinef 2]

Huh, are we suprised?

You still need to justify this war.

[Bernadotte 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Jinef @ 11 May 2003,15:11)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Huh, are we suprised?

You still need to justify this war.<span id='postcolor'>

No they don't.

They only need to present another heap of bogus evidence; this time claiming that the WMDs were smuggled out of Iraq into Syria, Iran and maybe North Korea.

[Badgerboy 0]

So if no weapons are found, the illegal war is now not even justified?

Am I the only one who's noticed a slight lack of media coverage concerning this?

Hell, if no weapons are found, do you think Bush should resign? He will have defied the UN, many countries around the world, and to what end? (And don't start on about the Iraqi people, there are many other countries around the world that would have better 'liberated' )

Time will tell.

[Guest]

Bush should certainly not resign. On the contrary, the best for the Iraqi people is if he gets re-elected so that he can follow through the democratic reforms in Iraq. If the Democrats, who were opposed to the liberation of Iraq in the first place, come into power - well, you can guess how quickly they'll pull out without honoring the commitment to the Iraqi people.

Who cares if no weapons of mass destruction are found? Look at the sum of the effects of this war. Can you honestly tell me that things are going to be worse now than they were when Hussein was in power? It will take some time to organize Iraq, that's for sure - you don't create a political administration from scratch in a month. These things take time and Bush has repeatedly assured the world Americas full commitment to that rebuilding effort. Just give it a bit of time.

As for Bush I say this: The best way of judging a leader is asking his people what they think of him. Bush has got a strong 70% support, which is rare for today's politicians. And America is truly a diverse and multicultural society so where is the problem adding one more culture under his protection? If he is good enough for USA where people have been living in a prosperous democracy for decades, why should he not be good enough for Iraq that is recovering from one of the most brutal dictatorships in the world?

[Balschoiw 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Bush should certainly not resign. On the contrary, the best for the Iraqi people is if he gets re-elected so that he can follow through the democratic reforms in Iraq. If the Democrats, who were opposed to the liberation of Iraq in the first place, come into power - well, you can guess how quickly they'll pull out without honoring the commitment to the Iraqi people.

Who cares if no weapons of mass destruction are found? Look at the sum of the effects of this war. Can you honestly tell me that things are going to be worse now than they were when Hussein was in power? It will take some time to organize Iraq, that's for sure - you don't create a political administration from scratch in a month. These things take time and Bush has repeatedly assured the world Americas full commitment to that rebuilding effort. Just give it a bit of time.

As for Bush I say this: The best way of judging a leader is asking his people what they think of him. Bush has got a strong 70% support, which is rare for today's politicians. And America is truly a diverse and multicultural society so where is the problem adding one more culture under his protection? If he is good enough for USA where people have been living in a prosperous democracy for decades, why should he not be good enough for Iraq that is recovering from one of the most brutal dictatorships in the world?<span id='postcolor'>

Where are the irony brackets denoir ?

[bn880 5]

Why, I think Denoir is quite sincere about this.

[Jinef 2]

Hmm the thought police have got to him.

[ralphwiggum 6]

do i see several people forgetting to bring sarcasm detector?

[Bernadotte 0]

Judge turns to denoir:  "The court finds your client, Lucifer, not guilty and free to enter heaven.  Furthermore, the plaintiff, St Peter, can go to hell."  

[FSPilot 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Baslchoiw

Where are the irony brackets denoir ?

<span id='postcolor'>

My thoughts exactly.

[SpeedyDonkey 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ 11 May 2003,19:25)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Bush should certainly not resign. On the contrary, the best for the Iraqi people is if he gets re-elected so that he can follow through the democratic reforms in Iraq. If the Democrats, who were opposed to the liberation of Iraq in the first place, come into power - well, you can guess how quickly they'll pull out without honoring the commitment to the Iraqi people.

Who cares if no weapons of mass destruction are found? Look at the sum of the effects of this war. Can you honestly tell me that things are going to be worse now than they were when Hussein was in power? It will take some time to organize Iraq, that's for sure - you don't create a political administration from scratch in a month. These things take time and Bush has repeatedly assured the world Americas full commitment to that rebuilding effort. Just give it a bit of time.

As for Bush I say this: The best way of judging a leader is asking his people what they think of him. Bush has got a strong 70% support, which is rare for today's politicians. And America is truly a diverse and multicultural society so where is the problem adding one more culture under his protection? If he is good enough for USA where people have been living in a prosperous democracy for decades, why should he not be good enough for Iraq that is recovering from one of the most brutal dictatorships in the world?<span id='postcolor'>

Sarcasm or not, i agree!

Oh... and Go Canada!

[FallenPaladin 0]

denoir is losing it...

[SpeedyDonkey 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (FallenPaladin @ 11 May 2003,22:27)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">denoir is losing it...    <span id='postcolor'>

No, Sweden is losing it, oh... wait they allready lost.

[IsthatyouJohnWayne 0]

I agree with Denoir. Its clear anyway that the war succeded. America and Britain attacked Iraq and Iraq has been surprised and has not used its weapons of mass destruction. The oil is safe. America and Britain are safe. The Iraqi people are safe. Everyone is safe. So clearly the war has succeded in its aims.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

George W Bush seems to have lost a little faith in his team in Iraq , with the unofficial mayor of Baghdad being called home sooner than thought.

But the US has done a great job building Disneylands all over the world so im sure they can manage rebuilding a lil place like Iraq

Seriously things arent looking very impressive at the moment. Yes its still early, but it was early about a month ago and things seem to be moving pretty darn-diddly slowly. There is a void that could easily be filled by extremists.

Whatever my feelings on the war i at least expected the Americans to have intensively planned for the post war situation. Of course there will always be troubles and upsets but certain things are simple and obvious to plan for. The needed translators and intermediaries dont seem to have been there. Coalition forces didnt seem to have anything by way of a list of the most important and obvious places to secure for Iraqs future.

Everything seems to have happened too slowly and in a reactive fashion, locking the stable door when the horse has already bolted way over the horizon. As looters burned or stole a lot of sensitive documentation this may well even have hindered the search for NBC weapons . The supposed reason for the conflict.

The CIA had no trouble recruiting Saddam Hussein for their purposes back in the day but they seem stumped now when it comes to finding Iraqi people who can help nail together a functioning democratic government or provide real leadership for the country.

[SpeedyDonkey 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">But the US has done a great job building Disneylands<span id='postcolor'> Well the one in France sucks and hasn´t exactly been a cash cow...

[Jinef 2]

I saw a great programme on TV, Bird, Fortune and Bremner.

The British military commander impression was funny as hell.

[IsthatyouJohnWayne 0]

"Well the one in France sucks and hasn´t exactly been a cash cow..."

Gee, thats that well crafted argument ruined then!

[Albert Schweitzer 10]

I disagree with the result of such polls (I mean the Bushs popularity). Firstly because in the US  companies that collect political-data  are rarely non-profit organisation as it is the case in europe. Hence the one ordering the information/statistics can choose amongst varried companies and pick the one that seems to provide him with the most promising results (and still sound reliable). This was also the reason why we saw so diverse statistics during the last election.

Some newspapers even declared Bush as winner before all ballots had been counted (and before people even had an idea about the mess of the counting methods).

Why I dont believe that Bush is so popular right now? Because most presidents of the US lost the election after having entered a war. Bush-senior is one of them and he was successful in campaign as well.

No I dont believe Bush should stay in power. Whether the americans stay or not is of no importance since Iraq will get the attention it requires. A US-occupying force could easily be substituted by a UN-force (I know that Kabul is smaller than Baghdad).

I believe that far more sophisticated decisions could be taken by the UN than by the Bush-administration.

This is due to the fact that the UN consists of  a pool of nations which can better sympathise with the Iraqi people and therefore analyse the strenghts, weaknesses, opportunities and threats of potential political modifications.

Well you know the term "agglomeration advantages".

It would take a long time till the UN would be agreeing on certain issues? Well yes....Iraq is such an old and complicated cultural ecosystems that we all must expecting not less than 10 years of consistent work untill....we see results.

I dont know the candidates of the democrats but a little political turnaround would allow the UN to renegotiate with new US-representatives and hopefully improve the relations between the americans and old europe (both sides should have learned their lesson).

Bush himself is quite happy about this intercontinental communication gap, he can rule worldwide in his  "JUST DO IT" style. No more burden of having to justify ones actions in front of the world-community.

[PitViper 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Albert Schweizer @ 12 May 2003,13:43)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"><span id='postcolor'>

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Hence the one ordering the information/statistics can choose amongst varried companies and pick the one that seems to provide him with the most promising results (and still sound reliable). This was also the reason why we saw so diverse statistics during the last election. <span id='postcolor'>

uhh.. the Republicans decidely defeated Democratic opponents in the last election cycle.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I dont know the candidates of the democrats<span id='postcolor'>

neither do alot of Americans it's a "pick-em" for a candidate in that party.

[PitViper 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Pukko @ 10 May 2003,21:18)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">and latsly but not least - gives reason to implement a "1984" society - the power hungry's wettest dream...<span id='postcolor'>

where? in Germany?

http://www.ananova.com/news....unlucky

That's funny. I see government protests on cars all the time in the U.S.

[PitViper 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Bernadotte @ 10 May 2003,09:43)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">PitViper, how do you feel about VP Dick Cheney spending 5 years as CEO of Halliburton?  Do you think there might be some connection between that and Halliburton having received two huge Iraqi oil services contracts without any competitive bidding?<span id='postcolor'>

That's funny.  I thought they withdrew from the bidding process. Of course, this has nothing to do with the fact that they are the number one company at these processes in the U.S.  So, obviously, they will recieve microsoft-esque criticism like this. If you want some real juicy oil company mischief, check out the TotalFinaElf cases in French court.

[PitViper 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Tex [uSMC] @ 09 May 2003,12:58)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Pukko @ 09 May 2003,18:15)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">btw, you Americans! Does mainstream US media at all report of the more and more destabilized situation in Afganistan?<span id='postcolor'>

Not really. All we hear is that things are slowly getting better.<span id='postcolor'>

well.. we are working on standing up a united afghani army as we speak.