Bush Approves use of Torture

[tryreading]

Hello neighbor.

This administration would still have made overtures about invading Iraq, several of the key players on Bush's team are on record pushing for this war since Desert Storm. But without 9/11, of course it would have been a much harder sell to the American people. Would they have succeeded? 9/11 was a tragedy in so many ways.

Probably an impossible sell. Without experiencing 9/11 first, how could attacking Iraq again have been taken seriously by so many Americans? Even though its leader was uncooperative in defeat during the 1990's, he and his country were under our thumb. For instance, they couldn't fly a plane unless we let them. But that's history. I hope things there continue to improve, especially for our people.

 

[teacher]

If you had followed this thread for the last few days you would know that the deceit I am talking about is the fact that this war in Iraq was sold to us as a mission to disarm Saddam.

You know mixedup, in a way you are right. Bush sold this war. In any fashion he could. To keep mushroom clouds in the future from gracing this fair land. It had to be sold. The majority of the American Idol watching unwashed masses can not conceive of the long view. It's one sound bite to the next. And you know what? When Bush succeeds no one will know because there will be no mushroom clouds over Cleveland, or any where else. Because there will be democracy in the middle east. I don't expect you to understand that. Go ahead and bash Bush. He's NOW doing what I would. And the only thing you can do about it is whine here.

Class dismissed.

 

[cnredd]

You know mixedup, in a way you are right. Bush sold this war. In any fashion he could. To keep mushroom clouds in the future from gracing this fair land. It had to be sold. The majority of the American Idol watching unwashed masses can not conceive of the long view. It's one sound bite to the next. And you know what? When Bush succeeds no one will know because there will be no mushroom clouds over Cleveland, or any where else. Because there will be democracy in the middle east. I don't expect you to understand that. Go ahead and bash Bush. He's NOW doing what I would. And the only thing you can do about it is whine here.

Class dismissed.

teach, you sure know how to see things clear when they show you fog...

As per a previous post...

But Bush knew the American people are fickle. If he told them that he
was going into Iraq to free the people and get the sanctions off of
the people's back, the Americans would've yawned and said, "Keep it
down...I'm watching Sex & the City."

http://debatepolitics.com/showpost.php?p=60786&postcount=8

mixed...I emplure(?) you to read my whole commentary...

There are people out there that UNDERSTAND the big picture, and I'm one of them...

Saddam should've been gone...The minute details and what was said on Tuesday but not Wednesday are irrelevant...

When the Bush Administration says, "Saddam killed thousands of people and put them into mass graves while wearing a green shirt", many want to say the President lied because the shirt was actually "blue"...

There is a term for that...It's called "Sweating the small stuff"...Defense attoneys use it well...

They like to cloud the bigger issue with redirection and minute details that have little bearance on the overall crime...

Throughout this forum, people(myself included) have shown multiple articles and documentation that contradict the "other side's" multiple articles and documentation....and back and forth we go...

It wasn't WMD...It was PRECURSORS to WMD!...Bush lied!!!
He said there was a nuclear reactor, but there was only nuclear EQUIPMENT!...Bush Lied!!!
Cheney said he "misspoke" on National TV!...Now he's backtracking!!!...he's a liar!!!!

etc., etc., etc....

None of it means anything...The bigger picture is all that matters...

Saddam was a douche...The whole region is an archaic mess...Get rid of the douche and set up a system where, in time, the region will(hopefully) get in step with the rest of the world and the problems we face now won't be our grandchildren's problems...

That's it!...The whole she-bang...

Anything else is just "Sweating the small stuff"...:2wave:

 

[mixedmedia]

You know mixedup, in a way you are right. Bush sold this war. In any fashion he could. To keep mushroom clouds in the future from gracing this fair land. It had to be sold. The majority of the American Idol watching unwashed masses can not conceive of the long view. It's one sound bite to the next. And you know what? When Bush succeeds no one will know because there will be no mushroom clouds over Cleveland, or any where else. Because there will be democracy in the middle east. I don't expect you to understand that. Go ahead and bash Bush. He's NOW doing what I would. And the only thing you can do about it is whine here.

Class dismissed.

I speculate, you speculate. Don't flatter yourself.

 

[mixedmedia]

You know mixedup, in a way you are right. Bush sold this war. In any fashion he could. To keep mushroom clouds in the future from gracing this fair land. It had to be sold. The majority of the American Idol watching unwashed masses can not conceive of the long view. It's one sound bite to the next. And you know what? When Bush succeeds no one will know because there will be no mushroom clouds over Cleveland, or any where else. Because there will be democracy in the middle east. I don't expect you to understand that. Go ahead and bash Bush. He's NOW doing what I would. And the only thing you can do about it is whine here.

Class dismissed.

And I am not bashing Bush. I am saying the truth. And you know it. Just because I don't see it as noble doesn't mean I see any less clearly.

 

[mixedmedia]

teach, you sure know how to see things clear when they show you fog...

As per a previous post...

But Bush knew the American people are fickle. If he told them that he
was going into Iraq to free the people and get the sanctions off of
the people's back, the Americans would've yawned and said, "Keep it
down...I'm watching Sex & the City."

http://debatepolitics.com/showpost.php?p=60786&postcount=8

mixed...I emplure(?) you to read my whole commentary...

There are people out there that UNDERSTAND the big picture, and I'm one of them...

Saddam should've been gone...The minute details and what was said on Tuesday but not Wednesday are irrelevant...

When the Bush Administration says, "Saddam killed thousands of people and put them into mass graves while wearing a green shirt", many want to say the President lied because the shirt was actually "blue"...

There is a term for that...It's called "Sweating the small stuff"...Defense attoneys use it well...

They like to cloud the bigger issue with redirection and minute details that have little bearance on the overall crime...

Throughout this forum, people(myself included) have shown multiple articles and documentation that contradict the "other side's" multiple articles and documentation....and back and forth we go...

It wasn't WMD...It was PRECURSORS to WMD!...Bush lied!!!
He said there was a nuclear reactor, but there was only nuclear EQUIPMENT!...Bush Lied!!!
Cheney said he "misspoke" on National TV!...Now he's backtracking!!!...he's a liar!!!!

etc., etc., etc....

None of it means anything...The bigger picture is all that matters...

Saddam was a douche...The whole region is an archaic mess...Get rid of the douche and set up a system where, in time, the region will(hopefully) get in step with the rest of the world and the problems we face now won't be our grandchildren's problems...

That's it!...The whole she-bang...

Anything else is just "Sweating the small stuff"...:2wave:

I understand that in the end, both sides essentially want the same thing. Peace. But leadership with the aim of peace can be practiced in many ways. I realize what you say is from the heart - what you truly believe, but my heart and mind tell me differently. It's not sweating the small stuff. If I was simply sweating the small stuff I would be one of the Dr. Phil watching members of the "unwashed masses." To say so of me, and others who think like me - to say that we are sweating the small stuff or missing the big picture is not only insulting, and sorry, arrogant, but exclusionary and simplistic.

And forgive me, but I find people who talk about "bringing democracy to the middle east" with one side of their mouth while calling its citizens "camel jockeys" or "towelheads" with the other; or giving lip service to "freeing the women of the middle east from oppression" while they make ignorant jibes at the "manliness" of some American women to be not only hypocritical but also common, American pigs. Generally, I don't take sides with these sorts of people. They make me ill. And I certainly don't want them representing me and my daughters to the world.

 

[MSgt]

Iran Leader Calls for Israel's Destruction

TEHRAN, Iran - Iran's hard-line president called for Israel to be "wiped off the map" and said a new wave of Palestinian attacks will destroy the Jewish state, state-run media reported Wednesday.

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad also denounced attempts to recognize Israel or normalize relations with it.

"There is no doubt that the new wave (of attacks) in Palestine will wipe off this stigma (Israel) from the face of the Islamic world," Ahmadinejad told students Wednesday during a Tehran conference called "The World without Zionism."

"Anybody who recognizes Israel will burn in the fire of the Islamic nation's fury, any (Islamic leader) who recognizes the Zionist regime means he is acknowledging the surrender and defeat of the Islamic world," Ahmadinejad said.

Ahmadinejad also repeated the words of the founder of Iran's Islamic revolution, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, who called for the destruction of Israel.

"As the Imam said, Israel must be wiped off the map," said Ahmadinejad, who came to power in August.

Ahmadinejad referred to Israel's recent withdrawal from the Gaza Strip as a "trick," saying Gaza is part of the Palestinian territories and the withdrawal was meant to make Islamic states acknowledge Israel.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051026/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iran_israel

Oh yeah...the region is in fine shape. "There's nothing wrong with this culture and to say otherwise is to be a bigot." What would a bunch of proffesional military analyst and regional specialists that have been ignored for two decades know? Palestine would not be such a problem were it not for the guidance and violent nudges it keeps getting from Tehran. Far from inaugurating a perfect society, the tyranny of the mullahs in Iraq have alienated the young from religion and generated cynicism toward the clergy. Ayatollah Khomeini's revolution brutalized Islam in Iran and now Iran's "elected" leader is embracing this doctrine while seeking nuclear power? The sooner Iran's government gets over thrown by it's disenchanted youth (70 percent of the population), the better. The sooner Syria's government gets taken out, the better. The sooner Saddam's regime get's taken out....oh...accomplished. The sooner we can stop relying on Saudi oil and start receiving from Iraq, the better. This region needs a hand up out of it's misdirected blaming state, it's oppression, and its desperation to please their god, which has created the scourge of the Islamic extemist, and who better to do it than the same country that rid the earth of the scourge of the nazi?

For all of you people that claim to be "ashamed" to be an American, I simply do not understand you. You people are lost in "political correctness" and a complete lack of will to stand up against this threat. I guess its easy to do that as long as you continue to pretend that their isn't one.

mixedmedia...I hope you learn how to protect your daughters from these people, since you don't want people like me doing it for you.

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally posted by GySgt:
For all of you people that claim to be "ashamed" to be an American, I simply do not understand you. You people are lost in "political correctness" and a complete lack of will to stand up against this threat. I guess its easy to do that as long as you continue to pretend that their isn't one.

I said we should be ashamed because of who we elected to represent us. Not in response or non-response to our perceived threats. Bush wants to torture people. That is evil. If you want to torture people, then part of you is evil too.

If the President of Iran said those things, then he is evil just as well. It was wrong for him to publically say that and I condemn him for it. Now, you will probably twist this in some way to make it look like I'm flip-flopping (a popular term), so go right ahead. You have my permission to mis-interpret anything I've said. Because in the end, that says more about you than it does about me.

There is one situation where I can see myself voting for George Bush. That is if you were running against him. I would vote for Bush before I would vote for you. If you were running this country it would be a dictatorship in a matter of days. You would probably run it like Stalin. Crushing any dissent or percieved dissent just like he did. You seem to be against the marketplace of ideas with all your rhetoric about how people should stop saying bad things about the government. If it was a good and honest government, I would tend to agree with you. But since it isn't, like I said before, you ain't gonna shut me up. Because I look at like my duty to say something to counter all these pollyanna ******s that cheerlead for the liar on the hill.

 

[mixedmedia]

Iran Leader Calls for Israel's Destruction

TEHRAN, Iran - Iran's hard-line president called for Israel to be "wiped off the map" and said a new wave of Palestinian attacks will destroy the Jewish state, state-run media reported Wednesday.

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad also denounced attempts to recognize Israel or normalize relations with it.

"There is no doubt that the new wave (of attacks) in Palestine will wipe off this stigma (Israel) from the face of the Islamic world," Ahmadinejad told students Wednesday during a Tehran conference called "The World without Zionism."

"Anybody who recognizes Israel will burn in the fire of the Islamic nation's fury, any (Islamic leader) who recognizes the Zionist regime means he is acknowledging the surrender and defeat of the Islamic world," Ahmadinejad said.

Ahmadinejad also repeated the words of the founder of Iran's Islamic revolution, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, who called for the destruction of Israel.

"As the Imam said, Israel must be wiped off the map," said Ahmadinejad, who came to power in August.

Ahmadinejad referred to Israel's recent withdrawal from the Gaza Strip as a "trick," saying Gaza is part of the Palestinian territories and the withdrawal was meant to make Islamic states acknowledge Israel.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051026/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iran_israel

Oh yeah...the region is in fine shape. "There's nothing wrong with this culture and to say otherwise is to be a bigot." What would a bunch of proffesional military analyst and regional specialists that have been ignored for two decades know? Palestine would not be such a problem were it not for the guidance and violent nudges it keeps getting from Tehran. Far from inaugurating a perfect society, the tyranny of the mullahs in Iraq have alienated the young from religion and generated cynicism toward the clergy. Ayatollah Khomeini's revolution brutalized Islam in Iran and now Iran's "elected" leader is embracing this doctrine while seeking nuclear power? The sooner Iran's government gets over thrown by it's disenchanted youth (70 percent of the population), the better. The sooner Syria's government gets taken out, the better. The sooner Saddam's regime get's taken out....oh...accomplished. The sooner we can stop relying on Saudi oil and start receiving from Iraq, the better. This region needs a hand up out of it's misdirected blaming state, it's oppression, and its desperation to please their god, which has created the scourge of the Islamic extemist, and who better to do it than the same country that rid the earth of the scourge of the nazi?

For all of you people that claim to be "ashamed" to be an American, I simply do not understand you. You people are lost in "political correctness" and a complete lack of will to stand up against this threat. I guess its easy to do that as long as you continue to pretend that their isn't one.

mixedmedia...I hope you learn how to protect your daughters from these people, since you don't want people like me doing it for you.

You know what I want? I want people to calm the hell down. What is really new here? Outside of 9/11 and the war, what is new? Wisdom does not come from the cuff. When it comes to all the fiery talk and violent rhetoric coming out of the Middle East it is coming from the few and folks like you hang on every word like it is the gospel of all Middle East citizenry. It does not help matters. It inflames people that don't know any better.

But that said.....
The president of Iran does not represent the people of Iran, as you must know from your use of the world "election." Of all the countries in the region, Iran is probably the most capable of embracing and utilizing reform. And the most capable, outside of perhaps Saudi Arabia (if such a thing were even conceivable), of influencing the spread of democracy in the region. Iran is a culture apart from most of the other countries in the middle east and the desire for reform is strong - and just a matter of time. Yes religious fundamentalism is also influential there, but so is intellectualism - the scourge of religious fundamentalism. Of course were we disagree is in how to "encourage" reform there.

I have read alot about Iran and find that most people are ignorant of their culture and history - and their ethnicity. I am sure you are aware, GySgt, that they are Persians and not Arabs. Many Americans don't know that, though.

 

[MSgt]

I said we should be ashamed because of who we elected to represent us. Not in response or non-response to our perceived threats. Bush wants to torture people. That is evil. If you want to torture people, then part of you is evil too.

If the President of Iran said those things, then he is evil just as well. It was wrong for him to publically say that and I condemn him for it. Now, you will probably twist this in some way to make it look like I'm flip-flopping (a popular term), so go right ahead. You have my permission to mis-interpret anything I've said. Because in the end, that says more about you than it does about me.

There is one situation where I can see myself voting for George Bush. That is if you were running against him. I would vote for Bush before I would vote for you. If you were running this country it would be a dictatorship in a matter of days. You would probably run it like Stalin. Crushing any dissent or percieved dissent just like he did. You seem to be against the marketplace of ideas with all your rhetoric about how people should stop saying bad things about the government. If it was a good and honest government, I would tend to agree with you. But since it isn't, like I said before, you ain't gonna shut me up. Because I look at like my duty to say something to counter all these pollyanna ******s that cheerlead for the liar on the hill.

Well, this isn't the first time his kind have said these things as millions of Muslims in the Middle East applaud such verbage and act as recruitment pools for Islamic extremists. This kind of speak comes from the mouths of Clerics in Syria and Saudi Arabia. Saddam Hussein was obviously smart enough and concerned over this for his own security, because he did not allow his Clerics to say anything that wasn't approved by him first. He maintained a brutal and oppressive atmosphere under the blanket of "sovereinty." We have just simply been ignoring them over the decades. We have come to a nuclear age where ignoring this region's oppresive, perverted, and abusive leadership is no longer acceptable to our positive security.

I don't "want" to torture. I have interrogated. I'll tell you about it sometime. I'm sure you will define it as torture, but hey...found an IED and he took us to a cache, in which I didn't even ask for. In the mean time, there are Marines and possibly Iraqi civilians walking the earth that otherwise would not be. I know President Bush doesn't "want" to torture. You've simply been made aware of decades old interrogation techniques that we have always employed, seen some pictures of unproffesional nasty National Guardsmen in Abu-Graib, heard a lot of BS stories from released prisoners that only wish to allow the media to "use" them and you have gone insane over it.

The rest of what you said was you just drying your tears. There..there.

 

[Deegan]

You know what I want? I want people to calm the hell down. What is really new here? Outside of 9/11 and the war, what is new? Wisdom does not come from the cuff. When it comes to all the fiery talk and violent rhetoric coming out of the Middle East it is coming from the few and folks like you hang on every word like it is the gospel of all Middle East citizenry. It does not help matters. It inflames people that don't know any better.

But that said.....
The president of Iran does not represent the people of Iran, as you must know from your use of the world "election." Of all the countries in the region, Iran is probably the most capable of embracing and utilizing reform. And the most capable, outside of perhaps Saudi Arabia (if such a thing were even conceivable), of influencing the spread of democracy in the region. Iran is a culture apart from most of the other countries in the middle east and the desire for reform is strong - and just a matter of time. Yes religious fundamentalism is also influential there, but so is intellectualism - the scourge of religious fundamentalism. Of course were we disagree is in how to "encourage" reform there.

I have read alot about Iran and find that most people are ignorant of their culture and history - and their ethnicity. I am sure you are aware, GySgt, that they are Persians and not Arabs. Many Americans don't know that, though.

He may not speak for the people of Iran, but he may very well have his finger on the red button one day very soon! If this does not concern you, well that's your ignorance, but it certainly scares the hell out of me, and I won't sit by and allow this threat to grow. I honestly believe if they are allowed to produce nuclear weapons, they will indeed launch them against Israel, we can not allow this. This is not just talk, these are religious fanatics at the wheel here miss, they are deadly serious, and feel a higher power is on their side.

The more I hear this talk, the more I wonder what we are planning to do about this irresponsible, dangerous regime? Why are we wasting our time in Iraq?

 

[MSgt]

You know what I want? I want people to calm the hell down. What is really new here? Outside of 9/11 and the war, what is new? Wisdom does not come from the cuff. When it comes to all the fiery talk and violent rhetoric coming out of the Middle East it is coming from the few and folks like you hang on every word like it is the gospel of all Middle East citizenry. It does not help matters. It inflames people that don't know any better.

Obtuse. I'm not hanging on anything. I simply see the widespread truth in it's effects. Most of the people in the Middle East do not subscribe to this Cleric hate speech BS. There is no argument here, as my writings have always said (As I'm accused of being a racist). The problem is that those same people are condemned to oppression under the leadership that continues to encourage said Clerics and they are doing nothing about it. Those same Muslims are considered "back-sliders" and are murdered for it. In Iraq you are witnessing (through TV) the violent backlash that Muslims receive for wanting anything other than an Arabic prescribed blasphemous Islamic lifestyle. You saw this in Sudan when 700,000 Muslims were slaughtered by other Muslims (Bin Laden's crew) and claimed "divine" rights. You saw that Ayatollah Khomeini's revolution brutalized Islam in Iran and the effects that failing society is going through. You have seen the murders of Christians and Hindus in Indonesia and India where this extremism has spread towards Asia. China's concerned about its province of Xinjiang. This is a civilization that is in trouble and as long as we stand by and do nothing our civilians will continue to die. It's that simple. These people need help and it's help that only our government is able and willing to spearhead. If (when) Islamic extremism affects more of Europe (mainly France and more of Russia), we will see more support from other governments. France believes it is safe, because it has turned its back on this problem. It's only a matter of time before they learn the same old lesson they seem determined to learn every few generations.

But that said.....
The president of Iran does not represent the people of Iran, as you must know from your use of the world "election." Of all the countries in the region, Iran is probably the most capable of embracing and utilizing reform. And the most capable, outside of perhaps Saudi Arabia (if such a thing were even conceivable), of influencing the spread of democracy in the region. Iran is a culture apart from most of the other countries in the middle east and the desire for reform is strong - and just a matter of time. Yes religious fundamentalism is also influential there, but so is intellectualism - the scourge of religious fundamentalism. Of course were we disagree is in how to "encourage" reform there.

I have read alot about Iran and find that most people are ignorant of their culture and history - and their ethnicity. I am sure you are aware, GySgt, that they are Persians and not Arabs. Many Americans don't know that, though.

Yes, I'm aware of this. This is why I have stated before that Iran does not necessarily need a military strike. (Maybe a future airstrike of nuclear facilities under current Iranian theocracy.) I believe that Iraq can serve as a model of Democracy that will spread into other countries. Iran is ripe for a revolution that will embrace a more democratic society. Will any of these countries embrace our form of democracy? Hell no. But democracy is the key. President Bush has hit on this, but my frustrations with the man is that he doesn't explain the things he say's, so alot of people aren't getting it.



HELL YEAH. I figured out how to spread those quote boxes out.

 

[MSgt]

He may not speak for the people of Iran, but he may very well have his finger on the red button one day very soon! If this does not concern you, well that's your ignorance, but it certainly scares the hell out of me, and I won't sit by and allow this threat to grow. I honestly believe if they are allowed to produce nuclear weapons, they will indeed launch them against Israel, we can not allow this. This is not just talk, these are religious fanatics at the wheel here miss, they are deadly serious, and feel a higher power is on their side.

The more I hear this talk, the more I wonder what we are planning to do about this irresponsible, dangerous regime? Why are we wasting our time in Iraq?

Because, Iraq is key to this region just like the other countries. Saddam had to fall. His brand of leadership had as much to do with the encouragement of oppression as Bin Ladens and the Arabic elites prescribed form of blasphemous Islam. Unless the entire region begins a transformation and embraces the 21st century, terrorists will continue to breed. Dealing with Syria, Iran (it will come from within), and Saudi Arabia (Got us by the balls), while leaving Saddam as a poster child for oppressive leaders would be counter productive. The Middle East watched his defiance to the progression of peace since the Gulf War. They watched him snub his nose at the "ever useful" UN. Taking Saddam out was a huge step to encourage this change, because right now the entire Middle East is watching Iraq form it's new government without the abuse and oppression of their former leadership. What mistakes Iraq makes, Iran will learn from. I believe that in the end, Iran will serve as the better model for Middle Eastern government. Our security depends on fixing this region and giving the people every chance to prosper.

 

[Deegan]

Because, Iraq is key to this region just like the other countries. Saddam had to fall. His brand of leadership had as much to do with the encouragement of oppression as Bin Ladens and the Arabic elites prescribed form of blasphemous Islam. Unless the entire region begins a transformation and embraces the 21st century, terrorists will continue to breed. Dealing with Syria, Iran (it will come from within), and Saudi Arabia (Got us by the balls), and leaving Saddam as a poster child to oppressive leaders would be counter productive.

So you don't believe there is any plan to deal with Syria, or Iran?

I mean, we've done what you suggested in Iraq already, it's time to move on to the next conflict, which IMO would be Syria. As for Iran, I just can't see us waiting for the people to revolt against their government, those weapons may be secured by then, once that happens, those people are as screwed as those in N.K!

 

[mixedmedia]

Obtuse. I'm not hanging on anything. I simply see the widespread truth in it's effects. Most of the people in the Middle East do not subscribe to this Cleric hate speech BS. There is no argument here, as my writings have always said (As I'm accused of being a racist). The problem is that those same people are condemned to oppression under the leadership that continues to encourage said Clerics and they are doing nothing about it. Those same Muslims are considered "back-sliders" and are murdered for it. In Iraq you are witnessing (through TV) the violent backlash that Muslims receive for wanting anything other than an Arabic prescribed blasphemous Islamic lifestyle. You saw this in Sudan when 700,000 Muslims were slaughtered by other Muslims (Bin Laden's crew) and claimed "divine" rights. You saw that Ayatollah Khomeini's revolution brutalized Islam in Iran and the effects that failing society is going through. You have seen the murders of Christians and Hindus in Indonesia and India where this extremism has spread towards Asia. China's concerned about its province of Xinjiang. This is a civilization that is in trouble and as long as we stand by and do nothing our civilians will continue to die. It's that simple. These people need help and it's help that only our government is able and willing to spearhead. If (when) Islamic extremism affects more of Europe (mainly France and more of Russia), we will see more support from other governments. France believes it is safe, because it has turned its back on this problem. It's only a matter of time before they learn the same old lesson they seem determined to learn every few generations.



Yes, I'm aware of this. This is why I have stated before that Iran does not necessarily need a military strike. (Maybe a future airstrike of nuclear facilities under current Iranian theocracy.) I believe that Iraq can serve as a model of Democracy that will spread into other countries. Iran is ripe for a revolution that will embrace a more democratic society. Will any of these countries embrace our form of democracy? Hell no. But democracy is the key. President Bush has hit on this, but my frustrations with the man is that he doesn't explain the things he say's, so alot of people aren't getting it.

I think somewhere in all this bullshit we could come to an agreement. I'm starting to think that this forum is more constructive as a way to blow off steam than as a medium for discussion. Perhaps this is common knowledge, but I'm not exactly savvy when it comes to internet discussion.

My boss is a classic Florida, straight down the line republican and I work very closely with him. I like him a lot. He's one of the funniest people I know, which is a definite plus in his favor. We don't really talk about politics much, but I know our conversations would never devolve like the ones on the forum do because it's unseemly to do so - maintaining friendliness usually trumps the pushing of opinions in the "real world." We all fight like husbands and wives in a bad marriage here. I have a little experience with this so I know, lol. So does unfamiliarity also breed contempt?

But anyway.....irrelevant tangent over.

 

[MSgt]

So you don't believe there is any plan to deal with Syria, or Iran?

I mean, we've done what you suggested in Iraq already, it's time to move on to the next conflict, which IMO would be Syria. As for Iran, I just can't see us waiting for the people to revolt against their government, those weapons may be secured by then, once that happens, those people are as screwed as those in N.K!

Iraq = Not yet. The way equipment and troops have been shuffled around the board, major pullouts will begin next year. I predict in the fall, however an Army General has stated Spring, but I don't see that. Of course I'm not privey to things as a General is, but I'm sure you have caught on though that Army Generals have the tendency to run their mouths for the sake of running their mouths. Not to mention that the passing of this Constitution and the December elections are key. We should hope that the large amount of Sunni that have been boycotting equality turn out, as they did on this Constitution, and get an equal amount of sponsership in this new government. It also helps us to know that a large Muslim country in between Syria and Iran will not rush to those country's aid. Hell, when it comes to Syria and the protection of Iraqis from Syria's international terrorist toll across the border, Iraq's Muslim military (of which we trained) may just join us.

Iran = We need to keep pressuring the weak UN and the appeasing EU on Iran. Since the EU has displayed much concern over Iran, they must be continued to be pushed to do the right thing. (Whatever that may be.) In the mean time, our government will not allow Tehran to develop nuclear weapons and neither will Israel. It is important that we keep Israel out of it and air strike any suspected nuclear weapons facilities that may pop up while the EU dances. A ground assault is not necessary. The disenchanted youth in Iran is the key to peace with us and peace between Israel and Palestine. Given what we saw in thei last "election", this may come sooner than we think (With a little help from us.)

Syria = Personally, I believe we're overdue to take a lesson from the Romans and the British before us and recognize the value of punitive expeditions. A punitive strike is in order, but not until Iraq gets running successfully. We need not feel compelled to rebuild every government we shatter. A withdraw that matches the speed of an attack might serve us and the Syrians better. A punitive strike at the Syrian military and government will leave the people an opportunity to follow Iraq's example. There are currently 17,000 "missing" prisoners in Syria. Many fear that there are mass graves much like was found in Iraq. Emphasis is placed on current prisoners that made bold initiatives to uncover corruption but more importantly, to correct the past mistakes of Baathism. Robert Rabil, an expert on Syrian politics, explained in a 2003 National Interest article, "the regime sent a clear message to the public that it would not tolerate any reform it could not control." The Syrians live in fear. Reformists inside Syria are encouraged by the events that transpired in Iraq and have publicly stated this, even if some loathe to admit it. While they do not want foreign troops to occupy Syria, they do welcome the Bush administration's willingness to consider reform, even if the State Department has been less than consistent in its approach to democracy and reform in Syria.

There are plans. There are always plans. Iraq, whether intended or not by this administration, has become very strategic to future endeavors. The Iraqis cannot fail themselves and we have to continue to provide them protection until it's time to haul ass. There is too much riding on it.

 

[Deegan]

Iraq = Not yet. The way equipment and troops have been shuffled around the board, major pullouts will begin next year. I predict in the fall, however an Army General has stated Spring, but I don't see that. Of course I'm not privey to things as a General is, but I'm sure you have caught on though that Army Generals have the tendency to run their mouths for the sake of running their mouths. Not to mention that the passing of this Constitution and the December elections are key. We should hope that the large amount of Sunni that have been boycotting equality turn out, as they did on this Constitution, and get an equal amount of sponsership in this new government. It also helps us to know that a large Muslim country in between Syria and Iran will not rush to those country's aid. Hell, when it comes to Syria and the protection of Iraqis from Syria's international terrorist toll across the border, Iraq's Muslim military (of which we trained) may just join us.

Iran = We need to keep pressuring the weak UN and the appeasing EU on Iran. Since the EU has displayed much concern over Iran, they must be continued to be pushed to do the right thing. (Whatever that may be.) In the mean time, our government will not allow Tehran to develop nuclear weapons and neither will Israel. It is important that we keep Israel out of it and air strike any suspected nuclear weapons facilities that may pop up while the EU dances. A ground assault is not necessary. The disenchanted youth in Iran is the key to peace with us and peace between Israel and Palestine. Given what we saw in thei last "election", this may come sooner than we think (With a little help from us.)

Syria = Personally, I believe we're overdue to take a lesson from the Romans and the British before us and recognize the value of punitive expeditions. A punitive strike is in order, but not until Iraq gets running successfully. We need not feel compelled to rebuild every government we shatter. A withdraw that matches the speed of an attack might serve us and the Syrians better. A punitive strike at the Syrian military and government will leave the people an opportunity to follow Iraq's example. There are currently 17,000 "missing" prisoners in Syria. Many fear that there are mass graves much like was found in Iraq. Emphasis is placed on current prisoners that made bold initiatives to uncover corruption but more importantly, to correct the past mistakes of Baathism. Robert Rabil, an expert on Syrian politics, explained in a 2003 National Interest article, "the regime sent a clear message to the public that it would not tolerate any reform it could not control." The Syrians live in fear. Reformists inside Syria are encouraged by the events that transpired in Iraq and have publicly stated this, even if some loathe to admit it. While they do not want foreign troops to occupy Syria, they do welcome the Bush administration's willingness to consider reform, even if the State Department has been less than consistent in its approach to democracy and reform in Syria.

There are plans. There are always plans. Iraq, whether intended or not by this administration, has become very strategic to future endeavors. The Iraqis cannot fail themselves and we have to continue to provide them protection until it's time to haul ass. There is too much riding on it.

That is indeed what I am concerned with, the possibility that Israel would be forced to strike Iran's nuclear facilities. I agree, this would have many unintended consequences, and would just fuel more hatred, which would lead to more violence. This would also disrupt the fragile peace between Israel and Pal. but it seems that is the goal of Iran and Syria, to do all they can to make sure peace is never realized there. This is yet another obvious reason these two countries cannot be trusted, and they have proven themselves to be nothing but trouble for that region, time and again.

I certainly hope there are plans to address these evil regimes, it would make Iraq pale in comparison, the good that will come from the total destruction of these terrorist states.

 

[MSgt]

So does unfamiliarity also breed contempt?

In some cases. Especially when dealing with change. We've seen this in every major religion in history. Religions change, because men change them. Fundamentalists insist upon an historical stasis, but evolution in the architecture of faith has always been essential to, and reflective of, human progress.

 

[mixedmedia]

In some cases. Especially when dealing with change. We've seen this in every major religion in history. Religions change, because men change them. Fundamentalists insist upon an historical stasis, but evolution in the architecture of faith has always been essential to, and reflective of, human progress.

Not exactly in the context I was applying it to. But I agree. As it applies to fundamentalists in any religion.

What's more, historically, periods of "adjustment" in the evolution of religion, often lead to periods of immense creativity and progress.

 

[MSgt]

Not exactly in the context I was applying it to. But I agree. As it applies to fundamentalists in any religion.

What's more, historically, periods of "adjustment" in the evolution of religion, often lead to periods of immense creativity and progress.

True. Certainty is comforting, but a religion’s capacity for adaptive behavior unleashes the energies necessary to renew both the faith and the society in which it flourishes. I believe Islam is going through such a period and is struggling for an identity in the Middle East - one of "creativity and progress" or that of a hang man's noose. Islams extremists and their mentors are determined to pay any price to frustrate those Muslims who believe that God is capable of smiling, or that it is possible to change the earth without challenging Heaven.

 

[mixedmedia]

I believe Islam is going through such a period and is struggling for an identity in the Middle East - one of "creativity and progress" or that of a hang man's noose.

But how often have we seen this happen:
that of a hang man's noose

compared to this:
one of "creativity and progress"

especially when you are talking about a religion as populous as the Muslim faith

 

[MSgt]

But how often have we seen this happen:
that of a hang man's noose

compared to this:
one of "creativity and progress"

especially when you are talking about a religion as populous as the Muslim faith

Religions have always persevered, but Islam is unique, because of our time period. The weapons to defend one's beliefs and to fight for "God", are longer swords and spears. In today's period, we are seeing suicide bombers that inflict mass civilian casualties and nuclear technology is a serious threat. This crisis has never been as intense as in the Middle East, where treasured values and inherited behaviors simply do not work in the 21st century. We can't sit by and wait for this civilization to catch up. This isn't a Muslim problem. This is a regional problem where the Muslim's religion is the center piece.

 

[mixedmedia]

Religions have always persevered, but Islam is unique, because of our time period. The weapons to defend one's beliefs and to fight for "God", are longer swords and spears. In today's period, we are seeing suicide bombers that inflict mass civilian casualties and nuclear technology is a serious threat. This crisis has never been as intense as in the Middle East, where treasured values and inherited behaviors simply do not work in the 21st century. We can't sit by and wait for this civilization to catch up. This isn't a Muslim problem. This is a regional problem where the Muslim's religion is the center piece.

Do you ever wonder about destiny? Are you a religious person, GySgt? Not to pry....you certainly don't have to say more than yes or no.

 

[DeeJayH]

Do you ever wonder about destiny? Are you a religious person, GySgt? Not to pry....you certainly don't have to say more than yes or no.

there is no god
the easter bunny and santa claus killed him in a driveby:shock:

 

[tryreading]

The sooner Iran's government gets over thrown by it's disenchanted youth (70 percent of the population), the better. The sooner Syria's government gets taken out, the better. The sooner Saddam's regime get's taken out....oh...accomplished. The sooner we can stop relying on Saudi oil and start receiving from Iraq, the better. This region needs a hand up out of it's misdirected blaming state, it's oppression, and its desperation to please their god, which has created the scourge of the Islamic extemist, and who better to do it than the same country that rid the earth of the scourge of the nazi?

If Iran's government get's overthrown by the young people there, we should cheer in the streets. When will it happen, though? There has been unrest in that country for as long as I can remember, of course it has been quashed. Syria's government should go,too. We can't do it. We can't continue to spread democracy militarily, especially if we supply most of the forces, experience most of the deaths and injuries, and pay virtually all of the costs.

We had a huge part in the destruction of the Nazis, but we also had true allies (I'm not forgetting we still have Britain, Tony Blair anyway) at that time who were beside us all the way, 100%. And we had a reluctant partner, Russsia, which after betrayed by Hitler began marching to Berlin and didn't stop until the Nazis quit shooting. They were an important factor too. I don't like to admit it either, but we need more help like this now.

Somebody posted below that we should hit Iran before they build nuclear plants and produce weapons grade material. This is naive. Israel will destroy any nuclear facilities in Iran before they are completed, as Deegan said. This will make relations worse in the region? Funny. The Israel/Palestine unrest is experiencing a lull, that's all.

You name a couple of the worst countries, but what about Saudi Arabia, for example, which pretends to be our ally, but produces so many terrorists? A friend of mine says its better to have a brilliant enemy than an incompetent friend.

Even some of the most progressive middle east countries teach their children very little except to love Mohammed and to hate us.