Anti-War/Anti-Bush = Anti-American

[teacher]

I have no problem with that. I support that. But for us to impose it as some here have suggested we should, is what I do not agree with.

I never "suggested" we "impose" it. Rather force it down their friggin throughts at the point of a gun.


I

said we compound our own problems and those of Iraq by insisting they have a Constitution that mimics ours, rather than one they design and approve of on their own.

I just got through saying, a couple of posts ago, that's what they're doing now as we speak. Noticed no response from that. Maybe if I put it like this.

The interim Iraqi government is right now drawing up a constitution that they will vote on this fall.

I potentially see it exascerbating their problems to the point where they may fail if those in the region perceive them as a puppet more than an independent nation.

Do you think they give a flying fuc*k about what "those in the region" think about them. Hell they're happy to be free. "Those in the region" are sending people into their country to try to stop this whole process. Think harder.

Like Tetracide said. You doom and gloomers have been wrong about everything. I would think by now you people would stop making morbid predictions that you're always wrong about. Must be hell going through life with such a pessimistic outlook.

 

[Alastor]

I never "suggested" we "impose" it. Rather force it down their friggin throughts at the point of a gun.

Okay, and all I'm saying is that that's not going to work - not well at any rate. I think I've given good reasons as to why. If you'd like, we can agree to disagree on the matter. I do think it's in both their and our own best interests though, if we use the power of persuasion to the best of our ability, even if it takes a while rather than imposing our will on them.

I just got through saying, a couple of posts ago, that's what they're doing now as we speak. Noticed no response from that. Maybe if I put it like this.

The interim Iraqi government is right now drawing up a constitution that they will vote on this fall.

No, I got it the first time. I think what you suggest as our response is a bad idea is all.

Do you think they give a flying fuc*k about what "those in the region" think about them.

They do if they're smart. This is where idealism meets reality. They damn well better care, or they'll crumble. They need to play a fairly precarious game of diplomacy as it is.

Hell they're happy to be free. "Those in the region" are sending people into their country to try to stop this whole process. Think harder.

Yep, and if we "make" Iraq do something Iraq doesn't want to do, we drive up the energy, effort, and lend credibility to those that argue we're setting up a puppet government rather than a free Iraq. Much as we've already had a knack for doing, we would fuel our own worst enemy.

I'd prefer we stop doing that at some stage.

But again, feel free to disagree.

Part of the gift of democracy is that we empower the Iraqis to make their own choices, rather than us making them for them. It's not entirely unlike when one raises a child to be an adult who then refuses to come take the trash out. They have a right to do things the way they see fit. If they're a puppet state, then we need to acknowledge that and be prepared for the consequences.

On the other hand if we don't want to be in the region propping up a puppet government until the end of time, and if we truly want to spread democracy in the region and find peace in the Middle East, we're simply going to have to engage them the way we do every other democracy; with persuasion and diplomacy.

Like Tetracide said. You doom and gloomers have been wrong about everything. I would think by now you people would stop making morbid predictions that you're always wrong about. Must be hell going through life with such a pessimistic outlook.

I don't see that I'm a "doom and gloomer" at all. I'm rather optimistic about Iraq, as long as we don't fulfill the prophecy of our enemies in the process, and fuel our own demise as a result.

I'd rather Iraq stand on its own, and make its own choices, and let time and democracy work as it is designed to do than be in there forever propping up a bogus regime, and fueling the arguments, hatred and zealotry that led to 9-11 in the first place.

Nah... I'm not a pessimist at all about Iraq - unless of course we actually do what we said we wouldn't do, and what our enemies insist we will.

 

[Tetracide]

From here.

How much more democratic can you get when it comes to drafting their own Constitution. I don't see any deadline that says something like, "American stamp of approval on Constitution."

Do you?

 

[Alastor]

How much more democratic can you get when it comes to drafting their own Constitution.

That's just it. Them drafting and being allowed to form their own Constitution is awesome!

But if we tell them what to or not to put in it, they're no longer drafting their own Constitution.

And all that exists in your timeline was a sham, and for naught. That's exactly why we must let them make their own choices, even if we feel they're wrong, or even if we know they're making a mistake.

Do you or don't you want them to be a democracy? Do you or don't you want them to run their own country?

Their is no "half-yes" option available. By default, the answer must be a complete yes, or a complete no.

So which is it?

 

[mikhail]

WEll if democracy is going to work in iraq. It has to be under complete control of the iraqi government. It shouldnt be an American style democracy if that doesent suit the arab and iraqi culture. I dont think you can just take one democracy and fit it around another culture.

If democracy is a forced model it wont survive it has to develope i think the west will have to except certain differences e.g cant expect iraqs to suport the same kind of equality.

 

[teacher]

From here.

How much more democratic can you get when it comes to drafting their own Constitution. I don't see any deadline that says something like, "American stamp of approval on Constitution."

Do you?

Remember Lt. Tetracide when I said with your ability to research and post links and my ability to annoy people, coupled with GySgt actually bing there, and of course my monkey army, we are unstoppable. You are the man.

 

[Tetracide]

That's just it. Them drafting and being allowed to form their own Constitution is awesome!

But if we tell them what to or not to put in it, they're no longer drafting their own Constitution.

And all that exists in your timeline was a sham, and for naught. That's exactly why we must let them make their own choices, even if we feel they're wrong, or even if we know they're making a mistake.

Do you or don't you want them to be a democracy? Do you or don't you want them to run their own country?

Their is no "half-yes" option available. By default, the answer must be a complete yes, or a complete no.

So which is it?

We agree! We want the same things for the Iraqi people. So why are we arguing? The people elected a government. The government (along side the U.N.) is drafting a constitution. That constitution must be voted on by the people. Then, another election will be held to meet the requirements of that constitution in terms of government power and position (if it isn't already).

No one is forcing anything on anyone. It's not true, there is no substance behind such a statement, so don't fly with it like you are.

I don't see anything wrong with the current method the Iraqis are taking in establishing their government.

Can we agree now?

 

[cnredd]

Remember Lt. Tetracide when I said with your ability to research and post links and my ability to annoy people, coupled with GySgt actually bing there, and of course my monkey army, we are unstoppable. You are the man.

No mention of the barca-lougin, Schumer-spoo hatin', monkey-army general with the code name "Big Lug"?

That's below the belt teach!...Just for that, I'm gonna bust myself down to Captain. I will now be referred to "Captain Big Lug".

The name is still covert...Please do not tell Novak....

 

[teacher]

No mention of the barca-lougin, Schumer-spoo hatin', monkey-army general with the code name "Big Lug"?

That's below the belt teach!...Just for that, I'm gonna bust myself down to Captain. I will now be referred to "Captain Big Lug".

The name is still covert...Please do not tell Novak....

Ladies and Gentlemen, the man who is going to whip my now complete monkey army into shape whose deep cover rivals that of deep throat, I introduce to you Major General cnredd. (Sound of crowd going wild).

I understand your busting yourself down to Captain, But the monkey army would have nothing to do with it.

 

[IValueFreedom]

No one is forcing anything on anyone. It's not true, there is no substance behind such a statement, so don't fly with it like you are.

We are forcing a change. You can't deny that. We took out/are taking out the regime when the Iraqi people did not initiate it. Now, this may not hold any water to your personal views of the nation building process, but it does to others'.

I would have to say that a lot of this, at least on my behalf, stems from J.S. Mill's views on anit-paternalism in the formation of states. So basically, if country A fights the oppressive regime in country B and sets those people free, they will never fully understand their new liberties because they did not have to sacrifice for them. And if they do not truely cherish those liberties as they were just handed to them, then they are less likely to hold and form good groundwork for a stable government.

So, in the case of Iraq, I would say that the democracy that they get today is not going to be as powerful as one that they fought and died for as a country. In any nation building process, there must be numerous crises that must be overcome to unite a people. And just handing them the answer is less likely to solve it in the long run.

It's 2 A.M. here, hopefully this has some sort of relevance and I'm not just talking out my butt.

 

[cnredd]

Ladies and Gentlemen, the man who is going to whip my now complete monkey army into shape whose deep cover rivals that of deep throat, I introduce to you Major General cnredd. (Sound of crowd going wild).

I understand your busting yourself down to Captain, But the monkey army would have nothing to do with it.

You think OBL is tough?...watch out for MGBL!...The champion of the chimps...The guru of the gorillas...the master of the mandrills...the leader of the lemurs...Ladies and gentlemen...I am......

the premier of the primates.

 

[Alastor]

No one is forcing anything on anyone. It's not true, there is no substance behind such a statement, so don't fly with it like you are.

Yet another sign that you didn't understand what we were discussing. I was speaking in response to those that said things like:

I never "suggested" we "impose" it. Rather force it down their friggin throughts at the point of a gun.

Apparently you missed that - but that'd be weird since I have yet to see you say, "But we're not forcing anything down their throats."

Not until just now at least. Prior to this there was no mention of this stance from you, and you were arguing with me about whether we should or shouldn't leave them to their own decisions.

In any case, my responses about it not really being a democracy if we impose our will on them are in response to the comments like the one I quoted a few lines up.

 

[Tetracide]

Well whoever said that was either joking, or they have no sense of logic and awareness of the current situation.

 

[Alastor]

Agreed.

But that's what initially launched the argument you and I have been involved in.

 

[stsburns]

Unfortunately, this has been translated somehow to mean that I am anti-soldiers, which is 100% not the case. I am completely behind all the soldiers who are out there with extremely few exceptions (i.e. some in Guantánamo Bay). Those men and women out there are making the ultimate sacrifice for what they believe to be the purpose of American Freedoms. These are the same sacrifices that the service men and women of all past wars, including the American Revolution, made. They are heros.

Completely doesn't have exceptions? :mrgreen: :think: about it second, you can't be for the soldiers then bash them with your other hand. Yes, but you fail to understand that more people died in the "American Revolution" than have died in Iraq. Of course if you were around then you would have the "The Revoltution is useless" just ponder it abit. For all you people that deal on numbers The Revolutionary War had 10,623 deaths Source. Iraq has had far less than that so why do you praise American freedom over Iraqi freedom?

Which is worse, not supporting a war which our country is in or sending young American men and women to give the ultimate sacrifice to serve an unjust purpose?

What's worse supporing troops then not supporting there job? Especially a volonteer force. So you are really either against TROOPS JOBS or AGAINST BUSH either way you should make up your mind. :mrgreen:

 

[IValueFreedom]

you can't be for the soldiers then bash them with your other hand.

I don't know where you think I've badmouthed the soldiers in any part of that piece with the exception of certain specific soldiers at Guantánamo Bay.

This appears to be the exact close mindedness that I face everyday by people who only hear what they want.

Let me clarify my position with an analogy, hopefully this clears some things up.

Okay, Jeff is driving down a curved, back country road that runs along a river. Jeff winds around a corner opening his eyesight to a new world that was once hidden on the other side of a hill. With this new view, a bright red car catches his eyes and he watches it run off the road and into the river about a 1/4 mile down the road.

Jeff sharply pulls off the side of the road close to where the accident happened and springs out the door. He bolts across the road and runs down the steep, rocky riverbank to find a middle aged man soaking wet and in shock repeating the name "Elenor" as his face is burried in his hands in hopelessness.

Jeff hears the name and instantly runs into the water. As the current is strong and there is a presence of shallow rocks, Jeff is constantly being beaten against these boulders, yet his mission remains undeterred. His only concentration is to save Elenor. He ducks his head under water and sees the same shiny red car and quickly dives under in a rescue attempt. He is unable to see well while underwater, so is only able to search for a few seconds before having to resurface in order to grab air. At the surface he has only time to look at the middle age man for a split second, who is still sitting with his hands burried in his face.

He dives again to search the interior of the bright red car, but still comes up with nothing. He looks all around the car and still no Elenor. He does this same process for 10 mins until finally he hears a voice yelling to "stop!"

Puzzled, he looks at the person who yells "There's nobody down there!"

Jeff still stunned and confused, wades to the river bank, again being pushed into the rocks by the current, but again not feeling the pain as his adrenaline is so high.

The person who was yelling says "There was never anybody else. Elenor was his car."

Now, nobody would say that his actions weren't heroic. Even though in reality he dove in the water to save a car, he thought he was saving a person. Because he thought this, his actions are no less brave and heroic than if there had been a person who needed rescuing. Does that make sense? Just because I am against sending Jeff into the water to save a car doesn't mean that I don't respect him just the same as if he went in to save my mother.

I am personally against the war in Iraq. Our boys have been sent in to search for Elenor the car. I disagree with that. I personally do not think that in this conflict they are risking their lives to protect the freedoms of Americans (Elenor the person), but since they do, they should be celebrated with the same honor, bravery, and heroicalness of those who fought in conflicts that actually did work to perserve our freedoms (hence the American Revolution). The world needs more Jeffs out there. They will at the drop of the hat risk and/or give their lives to do what they believe is right.

Now, as for the numbers about the American Revolution vs. the Iraq war, you're right. There were more Americans killed in the American Revolution than there have been in the Iraq war. Here's the thing though, I never brought up the amount of people who died as any sort of relevance to what I was saying. You seem to be rebutting any arguement that I never made. Either one of two things happened:

1) you're responding to someone else's post, in which case this point is moot,
or
2) you're only listening for what you want to hear, not what I'm saying, in which case... this post too will most likely do no good.

What's worse supporing troops then not supporting there job? Especially a volonteer force. So you are really either against TROOPS JOBS or AGAINST BUSH either way you should make up your mind. :mrgreen:

I hope I'm interpereting you correctly in your question, it's not worded very clearly. Hopefully this will supply the type of answer that you're looking for:

I am pro-troops
I am pro-military

I am anti-Bush
I am anti-Iraq mission

 

[stsburns]

I don't know where you think I've badmouthed the soldiers in any part of that piece with the exception of certain specific soldiers at Guantánamo Bay. This appears to be the exact close mindedness that I face everyday by people who only hear what they want.

We all know that Selling papers on our troops heads or "Gitmo" on the front of every news paper? That is publicly DISOWNING the troops because of their actions, I don't know why you can't see that. Maybe I should use your words "closed mined".

Now, as for the numbers about the American Revolution vs. the Iraq war, you're right. There were more Americans killed in the American Revolution than there have been in the Iraq war. Here's the thing though, I never brought up the amount of people who died as any sort of relevance to what I was saying.

Your still blined by what you want to believe and also acuse me of it? Many Anti-Iraq have used casualties to defend their reasons the soldiers should leave. No im not posting to someone else's post I was responding to your first thread, so where are those "Imaginary" posters your referencing?

I hope I'm interpereting you correctly in your question, it's not worded very clearly. Hopefully this will supply the type of answer that you're looking for:

I am pro-troops
I am pro-military

I am anti-Bush
I am anti-Iraq mission

Put me down some, you Extremeist's like to make everyone feel defenseless against you! That post clearly states your belief but still doesn't logicly make sense. Troops+ work for the>Military+>works for President->in which troops fight wars, in this instance Iraq-. So you support them and their higher officers, but Blasphemy to their Commander and Chief, and their own job. It just doesn't compute.

 

[IValueFreedom]

We all know that Selling papers on our troops heads or "Gitmo" on the front of every news paper? That is publicly DISOWNING the troops because of their actions, I don't know why you can't see that. Maybe I should use your words "closed mined".

Your still blined by what you want to believe and also acuse me of it? Many Anti-Iraq have used casualties to defend their reasons the soldiers should leave. No im not posting to someone else's post I was responding to your first thread, so where are those "Imaginary" posters your referencing?

Put me down some, you Extremeist's like to make everyone feel defenseless against you! That post clearly states your belief but still doesn't logicly make sense. Troops+ work for the>Military+>works for President->in which troops fight wars, in this instance Iraq-. So you support them and their higher officers, but Blasphemy to their Commander and Chief, and their own job. It just doesn't compute.

I honestly don't know what you're arguing and feel it would just be a waste of time to try and figure it out for myself, so if you could please just use this format to attack my original post it would be appriciated.

Here's the format. Unless it's in this form, I won't respond to it.

"This is what you said in your post:

Insert a portion of my post here.

This is wrong/inaccurate/illogical because... (insert a clear and concise point). This can be seen because... (supporting material to prove your case)."

Also, please make sure that the relevancy is clear. This is the main reason why I'm not attempting a response now. I don't know what in my piece you're arguing aginst. Oh, and please, no more "diagrams" (Troops+ work for the>Military+>works for President->in which troops fight wars, in this instance Iraq-.) They're difficult to put together when I'm reading quickly.

So, if you'd be so kind to rephrase your arguments, using the structure that I gave you as an outline, then I'll be more than happy to respond.

It really would help out a ton so I know what you're arguments are and I can respond appropriately Thanks

 

[HTColeman]

My favorite way that people say it is, "Bush is the President, if you don't like it, get out"

As far as altering intel, ?, but I do know that Bush and Cheney prey on America's fear of another terrorist attack. I would have to find it again but during the election Cheney had said, "A vote for Kerry may be a vote for another terrorist attack".

FYI, Cheney doesn't have a soul.

 

[Comrade Brian]

I think your right on the fears and Cheney doesn't have a soul

 

[stsburns]

I honestly don't know what you're arguing and feel it would just be a waste of time to try and figure it out for myself, so if you could please just use this format to attack my original post it would be appriciated.

Here's the format. Unless it's in this form, I won't respond to it.

"This is what you said in your post:

This is wrong/inaccurate/illogical because... (insert a clear and concise point). This can be seen because... (supporting material to prove your case)."

Also, please make sure that the relevancy is clear. This is the main reason why I'm not attempting a response now. I don't know what in my piece you're arguing aginst. Oh, and please, no more "diagrams" (Troops+ work for the>Military+>works for President->in which troops fight wars, in this instance Iraq-.) They're difficult to put together when I'm reading quickly.

So, if you'd be so kind to rephrase your arguments, using the structure that I gave you as an outline, then I'll be more than happy to respond.

It really would help out a ton so I know what you're arguments are and I can respond appropriately Thanks

I'm sorry you lack the intelect to have a logical discussion! I urge you to slow down on reading posts then posting a "Flame" post! In the diagram I show the process that the Marines work, also the (+,-) are you views of the process. I am sorry I hope that clears this difficulty reading the diagram. Fine I will rephrase, as long as you do me favor and take your time to read my post. I appologize if you don't understand my posts, sometimes mis-spellings and posting formats mislead my readers, and then they use it as way to dodge the issue at hand. It's just simply amazing!

 

[stsburns]

My favorite way that people say it is, "Bush is the President, if you don't like it, get out"

As far as altering intel, ?, but I do know that Bush and Cheney prey on America's fear of another terrorist attack. I would have to find it again but during the election Cheney had said, "A vote for Kerry may be a vote for another terrorist attack".

FYI, Cheney doesn't have a soul.

As black song would say "Don't believe the Hype!"

 

[HTColeman]

A black song? I'm gonna give you the benefit of the doubt and ask for clarification.

 

[stsburns]

A black song? I'm gonna give you the benefit of the doubt and ask for clarification.

Thanks! Here are the lyrics, and the group is "Public Enemy!"
Don't Believe The Hype Lyrics I thank you for asking about it! :2wave:

 

[HTColeman]

OOOOHHHH! I know what song you're talking about, you threw me for a loop.