Hayes, what evidence do you have that, "The indigenous insurgents are moving toward the political solution rather than armed struggle." I wish they would, but I see no evidence of that. As you know, I've never been for "pulling out now," but this just can't go on indefinitely. It maddens me to think about the host of mistakes Bush and his cabal have made with this elective war. They ignored the advice of the military people on the scene, believed what they wanted to believe, and started this stupidity with far fewer troops than were needed. They disbanded the Iraqi military, the one stable group that might have prevented this dissent into madness, post invasion. And to top off the incredible incompetence shown by Bush, Rumsfeld and company, early post invasion, when things began to unravel, when there were calls to increase the forces on the ground, they claimed they "weren't needed." How many times did you hear Rumsfeld say they were, "giving the commanders in Iraq everything they've asked for." He said that over and over again. So did Bush, when he bothered to speak to the nation. Early on, we could have brought in several more divisions to the theatre. It might have made a difference. We'll never know, will we. And I don't believe for a second that the commanders in the field didn't notice what happened to those who spoke up about "problems" in Iraq. Want to cut short a promising career? Do exactly that. And I can't believe that some of you think we should just "shut up." Hell, we should make a hell of a lot of noise. Bush's free pass expired a long time ago. It's only the last few months that most Americans figured that out. Better late than never. I think halftime may be about over. Keep D&D Civil.
Its in the article I started the Al Queda splitting with insurgency thread. http://bbs.clutchfans.net/showthread.php?t=104459 I agree with most of this. In fact I've pointed out some of those mistakes myself including what I labelled the biggest mistake of disbanding the Iraqi army. I said the calls to withdraw now emboldens AQ, it reenforces their believe that the US is a 'paper tiger' and that the American public won't see the conflict through. Further they use that for recruiting propaganda. There is significant reason to believe this is true: they've said it themselves, diplomats and other sources have confirmed this perception from Lebanon and with AQ specifically in Somalia. Now look at what you wrote above where I responded 'I agree with this.' I don't think any of those issues or dissent directed at those issues emboldens AQ (although its possible). I do think calls to withdraw now do so. So I, at least, am not advocating a blanket 'shut up.'
I didn't mean to imply that you were part of the group I was referring to. I don't think we can just, "pull out now." I do think that dissent is not threat to this country. Quite the opposite. It is part of our tradition. If any conflict cries out for dissent, it is this one. The last thing people need to do is keep quiet about this fool of a President, the most partisan and divisive in my memory. The best thing that could happen to this country is a crushing defeat for the GOP at the polls. Ironically, it would be the best thing for the Republican Party, and perhaps kick the extremists currently controlling it to the corner, where they can cry and whine without further damaging my country. For an idea of what the Republican Party should do, and some actual sane talk about the entire issue, read this... http://bbs.clutchfans.net/showthread.php?t=104566 Keep D&D Civil.
Sorry, that was the generic second person you, where 'you' are in the role of one an Iraqi belonging to any faction. I mean that if Bush keeps saying we are going to stay over there until things are stable, and one side feels that under the current situation they don't have enough of a share of power they can keep it unstable until they are in a better position, at which time a seperate faction can keep it unstable until they solidify their power... etc. It can go on forever. As for staying the course with a timetable that isn't really staying the course, since Bush has said he doesn't want a timetable.
i think the median standard of living is probably the best reflection of how the nation is doing. anyone track this?
You're missing the point though. I agree that dissent could embolden the war effort by forcing our troops to withdraw leaving the field to the enemy. That is a very real possibility. Whether I agree with that or not isn't the point. The point is that under a democracy part of fighting a war is to maintain the support of the populace. This is the very argument that GW Bush gives for saying that democracies don't engage in wars of aggression because its hard to maintain popular support in the face of what the populace ends up considering an unjustified war. This is exactly what we're seeing in action now. The Bush doctrine is working except its working against the Bush admin. As I said to Basso instead of blaming critics who are exercising their rights as citizens you and other supporters should be wondering why the Bush Admin can't maintain political support for something that you claim vital. Just telling others to trust the Admin or shut up isn't going to cut it. In a democracy you have to convince people not shout them down.
It sure worked that way in my old DOS version of Civilization. I always chucked the democracy because it was too hard to go fight the enemy.
No, YOU'RE missing the point. I am neither saying trust the administration nor trying to 'shout anyone down.' You seem to think the only dialogue that happens in a democracy is between people and the government. I disagree. Dialogue ALSO happens in a democracy between the people. AGAIN, as I said before, I am not saying you can't or shouldn't criticize the administration for EITHER the justification pre-war OR for the way the war is being handled. What I am asking from one person voicing his opinion to another is that you do NOT support the idea of immediate withdraw. That outcome is the LEAST desirable of any possible option. It emboldens our terrorist enemies and leaves Iraq is a poor situation. Maybe not worse than before the intervention, but definitely not where it could be. THAT, my friend, is ALSO an exercise in democratic dialogue.
i'm torn between supporting Feingold, McCain, Trotsky, Hamas, Chomsky, the Shining Path, OCP, Hans Gruber's organization, the Tamil Tigers and the Traveling Wiburys.
I have no loyalties nor affiliations. I think for myself, and make a decision. Preferably after hearing every angle of the debate. Frankly, I'm perturbed that FranchiseBlade would even write a post like this. What's the point of "choosing a side"?
Perhaps it was improperly worded. The idea behind the title isn't that people should pick sides. Some posters on this board have been accusing other posters of not being on the side of the U.S. The idea was for them to provide some proof of why anti-war posters are supposedly on the side of terrorists. It could all come out here, and they would be able to stop sprinkling those accusations in other threads. So far there hasn't been any proof, and basso hasn't even responded once. so I think we can see how much proof and evidence goes into his accusations.
Again, facts are irrelevant to the noeprogressives. And blade I think rhadamanthus was being facetious
Understood. In all honesty, I knew what you were getting at. Yet you contradict yourself, FranchiseBlade: The above quote states that one does not have to "pick sides" yet you proceed to label two distinct sides. For me, I don't agree with either "side". They both have their reasons and motivation, but to simplify it to a mere "all or nothing" is impossible. I think "choosing a side", any side, is morally reprehensible. It's political laziness, intellectual blindness, and demonstrates an aversion (or inability) to think for ones self. As such, patriotism is simply a mantra utilized by political power figures to manipulate the public. I used to enjoy Basso's posts, while I rarely agreed with them per say, they used to rationally present the counter argument. Ever since his comments degenerated into blind loyalty for his "side", and implications of treason towards those who disagreed, he lost the argument. Like texxx and TJ, he no longer adds any relevance to the debate. He can't, because he has let his patriotism to his "side" dictate his views. That being said, basso may feel the same about me or glynch or batman. IMHO it is, as deckard said, a matter of substance. I still feel that batman, for instance, provides plenty of support and rational argument for his opinions/claims - similarly, he addresses rational arguments and/or data that counter his posts. As long as that continues, the comment remains unique, and worthy of consideration. I would appreciate it if basso would respond to the post (as in the past), rather than the poster. Until then, my ignore list remains stagnant.
There are two answers to the contradiction. The first is that in the war there are at least two sides to the issue depending on how general or specific people want to be. Secondly it isn't about people choosing their own sides, it is about others putting folks in the place they see fit and providing evidence to support their views. I should have known that you knew what I was getting at from the beginning, but it wasn't even in 7AM here.
....again, selective reading by the hate-blinded liberals. I want to get a picture of a mirror to link in all of these threads to show you exactly what you accuse me of is actually you projecting your weaknesses onto me. You're guilty of the very activity of what you accuse me of! I humiliated the liberals on the point of the econony in this thread. The real wages data that delivered a true knockout haymaker to andymoon was particularly satisfying. They were unable to counter my factual evidence and eventually crawled away and disappeared on the topic.
Or they saved it for another thread that was actually about the economy and wanted to get back to the topic of this thread, of which you have added nothing in the way of substance and/or proof.
Wrong again, FrenchieBlade. The thread was relevant due to the fact that it related to the section of your post about posting negative news.
