The Iraq Thread 2

[ralphwiggum 6]

I thought it was because we built bases on muslim holy land, even though they never went into mecca.

basically, here's AQ's idea

1. TGS(The Great Satan) is helping Israel

2. TGS is building their bases at the Holy City

3. TGS rapes Kuwait to exploit the region

in other words, they try to blame everything and find every excuse.

Quote[/b] ]Yepp, but they don't have a separation between church and state nor do they have freedom of religion.

but they don't have some oppressive religous fanatics either. it's not like every aspect of SA, Kuwait, and UAE is ruled by oppressive religious fanatics. those people know how to mingle western culture with their beleifs, while extreme fanaticism will disallow any of that.

[denoir 0]

You can use Saudi Arabia as an example of integrated church and state, but I don't think it's accurate to use it as an example of a population happy with their government.  In any case, it's not a theocracy so the point is kinda moot.

You know the story of Iran becoming a theocracy? Shah Pahlavi the pre-revolution ruler of Iran was very pro-US and made huge social and economical reforms with the aim to westernize the country. The people of Iran wern't too happy about this and it resulted in a revolution. It was not "a few evil fundamentalists" that overthrew the Shah. It was a popular revolt.

The Saudi population is not happy with their government, not because of its absolutism, but because of its ties with the US.

I think you have a recurring flaw in your arguments and that's that you assume that all countries in the world want to be like USA. It is not at all true and especially not in the Mid East. And this is a fact that has to be considered when forming a government in Iraq.

It's a tough choice. Either you enforce a government that they don't like or you let them choose a government that doesn't like you.

[Balschoiw 0]

Quote[/b] ]You can use Saudi Arabia as an example of integrated church and state, but I don't think it's accurate to use it as an example of a population happy with their government.

The Saudis are lucky to be on the friend-list these days.

Otherwise the congress report on 9/11 wouldn´t be that black as it is now. Well TBA it is, isn´t it ?

You´d better gone to Saudi Arabia for your war on terror than to Iraq for...err... what was the reason again ?

It is disgusting what your administration does. They don´t even try to cover up their actions. Are you not interested what happened on the worst day for security in the US? Are you not interested to see what relations the Saudis had to AQ and especially to the terrorists that made all of the TBA piss their pants ?

This is getting more and more ridiculouse every day...but wait...people had to die for all that and they still die. Even americans.

But who can think clearly when terrorist warnings, freedom and democracy and of course WMD´s are in their ears 24h a day. Tactics ? Intentional ?

Yes.

[denoir 0]

but they don't have some oppressive religous fanatics either. it's not like every aspect of SA, Kuwait, and UAE is ruled by oppressive religious fanatics. those people know how to mingle western culture with their beleifs, while extreme fanaticism will disallow any of that.

SA is more fundamentalist in their religious control of the people. It's just that they don't let the religious leaders rule the country. As for (by our standards) intrusions in the common life (oppression of women, dressing codes, social structure, family structure, death penalty for possesion of pornography etc etc) SA is by far more oppressive than Iran.

And they most of the expect foreigners to follow their rules. A number of Europeans have been beheaded (sic!) in SA for "inappropriate sexual relations".

I know that USA forced through a number of reforms in Kuwait after the war, so I'm not sure how the rules are there. I don't know either how UAE is, but SA is as fundamentalist as it gets. They're not far from Taliban ideals.

[E6Hotel 0]

I think you have a recurring flaw in your arguments and that's that you assume that all countries in the world want to be like USA. It is not at all true and especially not in the Mid East. And this is a fact that has to be considered when forming a government in Iraq.

I don't think everyone wants to be like us.  I do think, however, that the west enjoys some freedoms that are inherently "good."  It's not a flaw, it's a difference in perspective.  From my limited point of view I don't believe that given a choice, people will elect to be repressed, persecuted and killed due to differing religious beliefs.  

Call me wacky.

It's why I was speculating about whether separation of church and state can be implemented (or even grasped) in the middle east.  From a historical perspective, the idea is pretty radical.

It's a tough choice. Either you enforce a government that they don't like or you let them choose a government that doesn't like you.

Who are "they?"  The Shi'ites, who would probably like to kill the minority for decades of repression?  The Sunnis?  I'm sure they'd love to live under a fundamentalist Shi'ite government.  The Kurds would probably be happy with not being massacred.

It's actually an easy choice -- we provide conditions that enable the Iraqis to build a government designed to serve its citizens and not the other way around.  We've got the easy part.  It's going to be up to the Iraqis to step up and get the job done.

Semper Fi

[ralphwiggum 6]

but they don't have some oppressive religous fanatics either. it's not like every aspect of SA, Kuwait, and UAE is ruled by oppressive religious fanatics. those people know how to mingle western culture with their beleifs, while extreme fanaticism will disallow any of that.

SA is more fundamentalist in their religious control of the people. It's just that they don't let the religious leaders rule the country.

that's exactly my point. letting religious leaders rule Iraq is not good for TBA, nor for Iraqis. But your idea of letting everyone in the race will have consequence that should be avoided. remember, in democratic elections, it is possible for small interest groups to hijack an issue.

Quote[/b] ] As for (by our standards) intrusions in the common life (oppression of women, dressing codes, social structure, family structure, death penalty for possesion of pornography etc etc) SA is by far more oppressive than Iran.

And they most of the expect foreigners to follow their rules. A number of Europeans have been beheaded (sic!) in SA for "inappropriate sexual relations".

in other words, prostitution?

[FallenPaladin 0]

in other words, prostitution?

No, e.g. a foreigner had sex with a married woman in SA (not married with him of course) .

[ralphwiggum 6]

in other words, prostitution?

No, e.g. a foreigner had sex with a married woman in SA (not married with him of course) .  

well, that's bad. you don't mess with other's wife. although the punishement of beheading was harsh, there are a lot more cultures where immoral behaviour is not tolerated.

[FSPilot 0]

basically, here's AQ's idea

1. TGS(The Great Satan) is helping Israel

2. TGS is building their bases at the Holy City

3. TGS rapes Kuwait to exploit the region

in other words, they try to blame everything and find every excuse.

Ok, but did you have to call us "the great satan"?

j/k

[Longinius 1]

"well, that's bad. you don't mess with other's wife. although the punishement of beheading was harsh, there are a lot more cultures where immoral behaviour is not tolerated."

Yes, immoral is one thing. Chopping someones head of for being immoral is quite another. Its not even the same ball park.

[denoir 0]

Scientists Still Deny Iraqi Arms Programs

US expert promises WMD 'surprises'

[FallenPaladin 0]

Surprises... Doesn`t this sound nice?

"Now I`ll let a rabbit magically appear in my tophat... no wait... it`s no rabbit... it`s Saddam`s WMD!!!"

[Gollum1 0]

Surprises... Doesn`t this sound nice?

"Now I`ll let a rabbit magically appear in my tophat... no wait... it`s no rabbit... it`s Saddam`s WMD!!!"      

"Hey, isn´t that a brand-new U.S Minuteman!? Saddam was more devious than I thought!"

[CosmicCastaway 0]

Quote[/b] ]The active deception programme is truly amazing once you get inside it

You could use the above quote referring to Iraqs supposed misleading of weapons inspectors, swap it round, and now apply it to the coalitions administration attempting to prove the existence of the WMD.

As for surprises... Nothing up my sleeve, nothing up my other sleeve...SURPRISE! still nothing up my sleeves.

Damn...

[ran 0]

the surprise might be that there's absolutely nothing of a nature that would lead to think it was WMD's or used to create those

[Crazysheep 1]

Quote[/b] ]"We have people who participated in deceiving UN inspectors now telling us how they did it," the US inspector added.

Read: "We've paid people to say they participated in deceiving UN inspectors now telling us what we want to hear" the US inspector added.

Methinks they won't actually find any, because they'll have been conveniently destroyed in the nick of time or moved away, undetected by satellite or anybody at all.

[ran 0]

huh ?

[ralphwiggum 6]

"well, that's bad. you don't mess with other's wife. although the punishement of beheading was harsh, there are a lot more cultures where immoral behaviour is not tolerated."

Yes, immoral is one thing. Chopping someones head of for being immoral is quite another. Its not even the same ball park.

unfortunately their law is that you behead for such crime. when you are in Rome, you follow their rules.

this illustrates a good point of cultural mismatch that Iraq will face.

for us, adultery is something that does not deserve such punishment. the worst outcome is angry spouse taking a weapon and going too far.

for them, it is matter of such punishment.

so the question is. should the final outcome of the Iraqi gov't end up in such way that they preserve the "traditional" muslim faith based gov't or something more secular that lies between western and eastern values?

[FSPilot 0]

It's a good question.  If we impose our western beliefs on them then we'll get people complaining that we're westernising the middle east.  If we let them continue with their "traditional" views then, 10 or 20 years down the line, we'll get people complaining "Oh yeah? Well the US put those evil decapitating woman-mistreating Iraqis in power!"

edit - ran, it's sort of a forum glitch. when you click the "quote" button it puts that tag at the top of your post, assuming you're the only poster he's quoting. so if the poster deletes all the stuff he wanted to quote and writes something else in the tag still remains.

[ran 0]

edit - ran, it's sort of a forum glitch.  when you click the "quote" button it puts that tag at the top of your post, assuming you're the only poster he's quoting.  so if the poster deletes all the stuff he wanted to quote and writes something else in the tag still remains.

hmmm ?

[FSPilot 0]

edit - ran, it's sort of a forum glitch.  when you click the "quote" button it puts that tag at the top of your post, assuming you're the only poster he's quoting.  so if the poster deletes all the stuff he wanted to quote and writes something else in the tag still remains.

hmmm ?

when you click the "quote" button it puts a small tag at the top of the quoted text. saying "FSPilot,Aug. 01 2003,19:54". that is, of course, the date the text was posted and who posted it. but if you delete all the text in the lower text box (titled "original post", it's the stuff you're quoting) the tag will still remain while the text wont.

[ran 0]

edit - ran, it's sort of a forum glitch.  when you click the "quote" button it puts that tag at the top of your post, assuming you're the only poster he's quoting.  so if the poster deletes all the stuff he wanted to quote and writes something else in the tag still remains.

hmmm ?

when you click the "quote" button it puts a small tag at the top of the quoted text. saying "FSPilot,Aug. 01 2003,19:54".  that is, of course, the date the text was posted and who posted it.  but if you delete all the text in the lower text box (titled "original post", it's the stuff you're quoting) the tag will still remain while the text wont.

i now see what you mean , but why not simply click on the reply button ?

[FSPilot 0]

Because he intended to quote you but changed his mind.

[ralphwiggum 6]

US releases doctored photos of Hussein

[FSPilot 0]

Heard about it on the radio today (had to drive a long way for a medical appointment. ended up in a 4 hour trip when you add in the "school" shopping )

I cant wait to see other hilarious "altered" images some people come up with. you just know they will

bomb saddam (contains, of course, crude jokes)