Tale of Two Wars

Given that the National Strategy really says nothing that hasn’t already been clearly stated or publicly presented in the past two or three years; given that it was in response to baseless criticisms that there was no strategy (ie critics who can’t read the daily news or comprehend simple speeches), it is not surprising that the published strategy should be led by someone who can restate the obvious to people who are incapable of understanding the obvious.

What I gather you are saying, Jay is the new bullshit is no different than the old bullshit.

Given that the Natioinal Strategy really says nothing that hasn’t already been clearly contradicted by subsequent events (weapons of mass destruction, Al Qaida connections, the gratitude of a grateful population for their salvation from the tyranny of Hussein’s regime, the degradation and torture of ordinary Iraqis in order to capture and torture those who resist the occupation of their country by foreign invaders), given that, as such, it was stated in response to criticisms that there was no justifiable strategy for the invasion or subsequent occupation of Iraq, it’s not surprising that such a strategy should be propagated by someone who can only restate the obvious misrepresentations and remain completely incapable of understanding any of them.

Wow!  Is this article insightful or what?

Joel Bleifuss states the obvious and, quite naturally, chooses the part which suits him for dissing.

“When the public believes the mission will succeed, the public is willing to continue supporting the mission, even as costs mount. When the public thinks victory is not likely, even small costs will be highly corrosive.”

Hey, Joe, the second sentence is what you and most media types have been parroting and the polls now reflect.  Bush finally woke up to discover people want an honest admission not everything is going as expected. Therefore, “The “strategy for victory” is not aimed so much at the war in Iraq as the domestic war at home.”

You think this is because, “ ...Bush needs to win in Iraq...” Yes, but it’s not about just Iraq.

This WAR is for REAL!

Suggested reading:

http://upstatenyman.blogspot.com/2005/07/this-war-is-for-real-by-mg-vernon.html

Dr. Vernon Chong’s credentials:

http://www.af.mil/bios/bio.asp?bioID=5000

WTH:

Here is the good General Doctor’s complete analysis of why “the Muslims” are attacking us. “Envy of our position, our success, and our freedoms.” That’s it. Wow! Is that insightful!  Then he goes on to say that the US has done nothing to provoke attacks.  That is horseshit pure and simple.

Islamo-Fascism! Islamo-Fascism! Islamo-Fascism! Islamo-Fascism!  Just repeat until your brain turns to jelly.

The author is really covering two distinctly different issues here:  There is the war and the economic scam which is now spreading through globalization. 

Since I knew full well what to expect in response to my first post on this article, I decided to deal with what I believe to be the second of the two topics in a separate post.
------------------
Unfortunately it is not just the Republicans who are playing fast and loose with lobbyists. This is bipartisanship at its most efficient. The author didn’t mention this, but I recently heard 47% of those lobbying for foreign companies and countries are former members of Congress.

A friend just sent me this Einstein quote…

“The economic anarchy of capitalist society as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of the evil.... Private capital tends to be concentrated in a few hands...[resulting in] an oligarchy of private capital, the enormous power of which cannot be effectively checked even by a democratically organized political society. This is true since the members of legislative bodies are selected by political parties, largely financed or otherwise influenced by private capitalists.... The consequence is that the representatives of the people do not in fact sufficiently protect the interest of the underprivileged sections of the population.

Moreover...private capitalists inevitably control directly or indirectly, the main sources of information (press, radio, education). it is thus extremely difficult and indeed in most cases quite possible for the individual citizen to come to objective conclusions and to make intelligent use of his political rights.

The crippling of individuals I consider the worst evil of capitalism. our whole educational system suffers from this evil. An exaggerated competitive attitude is inculcated into the student, who is trained to worship acquisitive success as a preparation for his future career.”

Albert Einstein, 1949

So this is not new, however, the practice has been developed into a fine art form.  A good example: The American Jobs Creation Act of 2004 does not guarantees jobs will created in America. It manages to give corporations a big tax break while catering to foreign trade objections and still sounding good to U.S. voters.

As for the reforms ever being enacted… Not likely, but those proposing them may just be doing so knowing full well they can get credit for the talk, while never needing to walk the walk.

What the heck, WTH?;

What are you saying?  Politicians lie?  Unregulated capitalism sucks?  Both parties’ establishments are bought and paid for by corporate interests?  Tell me something I don’t know.

Here’s some reading for you WTH: 

On the War

On the Economy

I know he’s just an editorial writing journalist in the MSM and therefore having zero bona fides in your oh-so-well-informed opinion, but he writes well and what he says is consistent and well reasoned.

LB

You say, “Tell me something I don’t know.”

I don’t think I can.  If you already know you get sarcastic and if you disagree with it you reject it out of hand. 

I’ll ask — not tell.

What if Vernon Chong’s view is absolutely correct?

What if we are hit by a dirty bomb, chemical or biological device, what if a few square miles of the U.S. is destroyed and unuseable forever and thousands of people die?

Wouldn’t you still think it is our own fault?

Don’t you pretty much have that reaction to whatever the issue?

Is it not likely the response would be a demand to nuke the bastards and to hell with them?

I heard a bit of that after 9/11.

As for telling you anything, it reminds me of a story my mother used to tell about men and women arguing.

Someone had cut the rope and a man and his wife were adrift in a small, leaky boat.

He said, “It was cut with a knife,”

“No, declared his wife, a scissors.”

As they continued the boat sank lower and finally went under. Up through the bubbles came the wife’s hand — her two fingers forming a scissors action.

No matter what, the woman still gets the last word 60+ years later.

Oh. That woman might be me.

What if? What if? What if, WTH?  You might want to do a little research on “dirty bombs”, it might bring you around to the conclusion that they’re not nearly as devastating as a Chernobyl, and so you might want to rail against the threats posed by nuclear power plants---especially at a time when most of our reactors are old or new, and most statistically likely to malfunction. One in five chance of a Chernobyl type nuclear accident in the next decade. And NASA is taking a 1 in 300 chance of accidentally spilling plutonium on our beloved little planet.

Oh, the fact that we’ve contaminated a good deal of Afghanistan and Iraq with radiological material is different, isn’t it? It’s always different when the U.S. does it, though our victims always ends up just as sick and dead as they would be if someone else had done it.

If the U.S. can’t get over a dirty bomb, it shouldn’t be raring to make tactical nukes, unless of course, fairness is not an issue and double standards are justified on the basis of our ‘chosen people’ status. Dirty bombs and chemical and biological weapons may be called “weapons of mass destruction” but they don’t hold a candle to nukes.

If you can’t see how pathetic it is to take pride in the fact that we haven’t nuked a country then I think you might want to consider raising your standards on behalf of our beloved nation.

The U.S. has a first strike policy, even against countries that do not have nuclear weapons, if the administrations thinks that the targeted nation might pose a threat. What is noble about this farce?

What makes you so sure that the administration would not use nukes when they are making practice runs to do just exactly that right now, AND not against a country that set off a dirty bomb in our nation, but a country that might because it is enriching uranium, just like we enrich uranium to use as fuel in nuclear reactors.

Japan, whom we have nuked* makes plutonium for their reactors. Why aren’t we threatening them? Oh yea, they aren’t a Moslem nation. And Moslems are evil and envious of our freedoms (so we better get rid of ‘em (the freedoms and the Moslems (just to be on the safe side))).

And---oh yeah (one last word) the threat of global annihilation through accidental launches or misread signals is greater now than it was during the Cold War. If you feel threatened by radioactive possibilities you might want to root for disarmament instead of killing all possible enemies and poisoning their land for all time. Nothing like an enemy that has nothing to lose.

*We are the only nation to attack a nation with nukes thus far.

Ah, WTH:

If is the biggest word in the English language. 

If there are persons among the Islamic Nations that wish us harm through terroristic demonstrations, there is no rational reason to think that continuing a brutal occupation in Iraq will either diminish their number or their determination.  To think that because this handful of criminals (at least before we went into Iraq they were a relative few) cloak their political agenda in religious rhetoric, declaring war on that religion is going to strip them of credibility is not just stupid, it’s pathological.

I really am not concerned with placing blame. On America or Islam.  I really am concerned with creating the conditions for all human beings to live in relative peace and happiness.  Do you wish to help or hinder?  I really would like to know.

In the end, man is not entirely guilty — he did not start history. Nor is he wholly innocent — he continues it.

The evil that is in the world always comes of ignorance, and good intentions may do as much harm as malevolence, if they lack understanding. On the whole men are more good than bad; that, however, isn’t the real point. But they are more or less ignorant, and it is this that we call vice or virtue; the most incorrigible vice being that of an ignorance which fancies it knows everything and therefore claims for itself the right to kill. There can be no true goodness, nor true love, without the utmost clear-sightedness.

Albert Camus

Just looked up “blame” in the dictionary. 1. to hold responsible; find fault with; censure:  I don’t blame you for leaving him. 2. to place the responsibility for (a fault, error, etc.)(usually followed by “on"): I blame the accident on her. 3. informal to blast, damn (used as a mild curse) : Blame the rotten luck. 4. to blame, at fault; censurable: <i>I am to blame for his lateness.

I’m comfortable with blaming this administration for the mess in Iraq. If they can’t handle blame reasonably they can’t handle power responsibly.

I have yet to see the MSM challenge this administration with 1/4 of the censure with which slackers were faced in my painting classes at critique time.  It’s ridiculous how little music these people have had to face thus far. 

When I think of the horror that they have dealt I think “blame” is simply not enough. To impeach, to accuse, to indict, to prosecute, to convict, etc, first requires the laying of blame where blame belongs.  And the blame most certainly does not belong to Iraq and its people. 

Blaming the victim is wrong. Blaming the perpetrator is what we’re supposed to do when we want justice.

I am not taking pride in not having used nukes on them (so quick to jump to conclusions).  I fear public reaction could bring that kind of reaction if attacked again.

You may choose to believe what you will, but people react to perceptions — it will not be you nor I who will be making the decisions.

(I am concerned about nuclear plants as well. I happen to live downwind of one less than 20 miles away.)

I firmly believe we are in a fight in which there is no second place winner.

No first place winner, either WTH.

We, individually, can only decide to conduct our selves morally and with compassion or go along with the mindless passions of the herd.  Which shall it be, WTH?

Wiley, I am in love with your passion, but I personally would be happy just to see an end to the perpetuation of injustice.  Locking the perpetrators up for the rest of their sorry lives would just be icing on the cake.

whattheheck,

Thanks for the link to Dr. Chong’s site. Interesting.

Though in the wake of yet another example of success for the Iraqi Democracy, I think all the shrill pontifications we are hearing is more from those who have a worldview mindset that they refuse to accept as no longer relevant.

Wheee!  Another dog and pony show and we can declare victory and all go home.  What?  We can’t go home?  We gotta stay and kill more irrelevant brown people?  Damn, I feel so shrill.

Speaking of the success of Democracy, Jay-Jay, how does this FACTOID fit in with your theory of no longer relevant weltanschauungen?  Will you be reconsidering next year when Mexico elects uno presidente socialismo?

Speaking of the success of Democracy, Jay-Jay, how does this FACTOID fit in with your theory of no longer relevant weltanschauungen?  Will you be reconsidering next year when Mexico elects uno presidente socialismo?

lb,

You are a putz.

Democracy is not a right or left issue.

It is one of freedom.

People get the kind of politics they vote for, and have a right to.

The choice of President for Bolivia is up to the people of Bolivia. Are you saying the election was rigged?

No, Jay-Jay, I’m just saying the election in Iraq was a dog and pony show.  It won’t make Iraq into a democracy.  Only the people can do that.  I’m so glad you admit that the people of Bolivia are not irrelevant.

Ten Million Dogs and Ponies.

What a Show!

But I guess you feel the Iraqi people are irrelevant?

Not at all, Jay-Jay.

I just have little faith the tightly vetted and empirically powerless ‘government’ that this so called ‘free’ election establishes will in any respect reflect the considered will of the Iraqi people.

I feel the participation of ten million as the most visible and available act of expressing their hope that the U.S. military will leave their country at the soonest possible time, enervating.  I am, contrariwise, filled with dread their hope may be a vain one.

Lumens, I understand your desire. I also just happen to believe that after attacking and arresting Iraq, apology will be meaningless without consequences for the offenders.

It would be more than icing on a cake, it would be an important and long overdue message to the world that we don’t think it’s o.k. to attack innocent people in their homes. And it would send the message that rich white guys with power can be every bit as criminal and more than poor black guys with squat.

WTH, why do you bring it up that we haven’t nuked anyone (lately).  You insist on giving U.S. credit for that. I haven’t set a cat on fire today, never did. Aren’t I sweet.

I’m sorry you live close to a nuclear power plant. You are wise to be concerned about it, I hope you and your family have prepared yourselves and have a plan for meeting up and getting clear of the area. Seriously. We all saw New Orleans, right.

I agree, Wiley.  It’s just that stopping the killing and abuse strikes me as a priority.  These legal things take awhile.  I don’t expect them to disappear because “I” am not emphasizing their importance.  But you’ve got my willing permission to do so.

“Let it ring from every mountaintop… ‘Let my people go!’”

Yep and amen, Lumens. 

It pains me to see this over and over again. After our government sends troops to kill people for whatever reason, the national debate focuses on whether or not it was “worth it”.  “Worth it for whom?”

What “justifies” it? “Winning”, of course. And if we don’t “win”, well there is always “good intentions”.

As long as a political body can get away with this crap, they will continue killing and abusing.

Do you have any concept of the formation of the U.S.? Maybe I’m jumping to conclusions here and you are not U.S. citizens.

The war lasted eight long and difficult years. It took a year to ratify our Constitution. We stumbled allong for a while with the Articles of the Confederation. England, for several years after the fighting stopped, thought we would fall apart annd crawl back to them.

Instead of blaming every death in Iraq on the U.S. you could read something other than sites like this and broaden your scope a bit.

I have had the advantage of hearing live and in person from returning soldiers and Marines, male and female who tell a much more encouraging story than the media and politicians.

I get the feeling you will be totally disappointed if the Iraqis, with our help, can pull this off.  Are you total pacifists who just freeload on those who have given their lives for this society where we can say whatever we choose?

Yeah.  And that war wasn’t over until the British Army left.

What we had after the Constitutional Convention was an Autocratic Republic with the sop of a popularly elected House of Representatives through the franchise held exclusively by white men of property.  We’ve struggled for two hundred years plus to extend that representation and franchise but we are still a long ways from a true democracy.  We’ve been advancing to the rear mostly during my lifetime.  I actually have more hope for the Iraqis than for us.  Once the US gets outta there.

Most of the people who have given their lives for the advancement of freedom were not soldiers. 

Most soldiers have given their lives for the advancement of the powers that be.  Only rarely has any military action protected or advanced freedom.  The Civil War and WWII come to mind, but I still don’t think advancing freedom was a predominant factor in those conflicts.  Just a side effect.

WTH;

The fact that you hold pacifism in such disdain means to me only that you do not possess the courage to be a pacifist.

For those other soldiers you don’t want to talk to WTH:

AND THE BAND PLAYED
WALTZING MATILDA

When I was a young man I carried my pack
And I lived the free life of a rover
From the Murrays green basin to the dusty outback
I waltzed my Matilda all over
Then in nineteen fifteen my country said Son
It’s time to stop rambling ‘cause there’s work to be done
So they gave me a tin hat and they gave me a gun
And they sent me away to the war
And the band played Waltzing Matilda
As we sailed away from the quay
And amidst all the tears and the shouts and the cheers
We sailed off to Gallipoli

How well I remember that terrible day
How the blood stained the sand and the water
And how in that hell that they called Suvla Bay
We were butchered like lambs at the slaughter
Johnny Turk he was ready, he primed himself well
He chased us with bullets, he rained us with shells
And in five minutes flat he’d blown us all to hell
Nearly blew us right back to Australia
But the band played Waltzing Matilda
As we stopped to bury our slain
We buried ours and the Turks buried theirs
Then we started all over again

Now those that were left, well we tried to survive
In a mad world of blood, death and fire
And for ten weary weeks I kept myself alive
But around me the corpses piled higher
Then a big Turkish shell knocked me arse over tit
And when I woke up in my hospital bed
And saw what it had done, I wished I was dead
Never knew there were worse things than dying
For no more I’ll go waltzing Matilda
All around the green bush far and near
For to hump tent and pegs, a man needs two legs
No more waltzing Matilda for me

So they collected the cripples, the wounded, the maimed
And they shipped us back home to Australia
The armless, the legless, the blind, the insane
Those proud wounded heroes of Suvla
And as our ship pulled into Circular Quay
I looked at the place where my legs used to be
And thank Christ there was nobody waiting for me
To grieve and to mourn and to pity
And the band played Waltzing Matilda
As they carried us down the gangway
But nobody cheered, they just stood and stared
Then turned all their faces away

And now every April I sit on my porch
And I watch the parade pass before me
And I watch my old comrades, how proudly they march
Reliving old dreams of past glory
And the old men march slowly, all bent, stiff and sore
The forgotten heroes from a forgotten war
And the young people ask, “What are they marching for?”
And I ask myself the same question
And the band plays Waltzing Matilda
And the old men answer to the call
But year after year their numbers get fewer
Some day no one will march there at all

Waltzing Matilda, Waltzing Matilda
Who’ll come a waltzing Matilda with me
And their ghosts may be heard as you pass the Billabong
Who’ll come-a-waltzing Matilda with me?

copyright © Eric Bogle

WTH, it is so obvious that it’s embarrasing to have to point it out---when “we” fought for “our” independence “we” were fighting for “our” independence”.

The fact that you hold pacifism in such disdain means to me only that you do not possess the courage to be a pacifist.

Thank you Luminous Beauty.

What the Heck, I would also mention that plenty of pacifists have given their lives for their respective societies.

Being a pacifist to save your own life is normal, being a pacifist for the lives of others is true pacifism.

Jacob Borer

Have I posted this before?  If so, it’s worth repeating:

Without Blinking
During the civil wars in feudal Japan, an invading army would quickly sweep into a town and take control. In one particular village, everyone fled just before the army arrived - everyone except the Zen master. Curious about this old fellow, the general went to the temple to see for himself what kind of man this master was. When he wasn’t treated with the deference and submissiveness to which he was accustomed, the general burst into anger. “You fool,” he shouted as he reached for his sword, “don’t you realize you are standing before a man who could run you through without blinking an eye!” But despite the threat, the master seemed unmoved. “And do you realize,” the master replied calmly, “that you are standing before a man who can be run through without blinking an eye?”

To my shame it just struck me that ordinary generosity behooves me to share
the source of this short tale. 
A nice little collection.

I love stories. A very nice collection. Many thanks.

If all had been pacifists we would not be having these conversations.

Your distain for the U.S. is so evident, where is it better?

It must be a real downer to be so dissatisfied with everything.

Too sad.

WTH:  Your efforts at sarcasm are small.

If all had been pacifists there would have been no wars.  It would be a completely different world in which people are free to govern themselves through mutual consideration.  Free from the manipulations of machiavellian rulers who pit one people against another to secure their own power.

My disdain is not for my country or the vast majority of its people which I deeply love.  My disdain is for our corporate rulers and their bought and paid for politicians of both parties who mouth the words ‘liberty’, ‘justice’, ‘democracy’, and act only to feather their own nests by protecting the unearned accumulation of unconscionable wealth by the very rich and leave ordinary people to fend for themselves in an atmosphere of dog eat dog competition for an ever shrinking piece of the pie.  My disdain is for old men who send young men off to die for no good reason.  My disdain is for fools who never question authority but sycophantically echo whatever they are told by scurrilous lying demagogues.

The lack of specificity makes your question “where is it better?” difficult to answer.  I’ve been all over this country and to Canada and Mexico and seen much of beauty and wonder.  I’ve met fine, funny, generous, open and friendly people everywhere.  But I still feel my home in the west is best.  It’s a matter of personal prejudice.  I’m sure that view is shared by others where ever they are from.  It is their right. 

What is sadder than seeing the true nature of the conditions of human existence is being oblivious in one’s protected little petty bourgeois fantasyland.

lb,

you continue to amaze me with your ability to ignore the obvious and twist the truth.

Are you comparing 18th Century Britian in America with our troops in Iraq today? The parallels are so uncanny that I don’t see even one.

Please educate me.

luminous beauty - “I actually have more hope for the Iraqis than for us.  Once the US gets outta there.”

I also have hope for the Iraqis now. Did you have the same hope while they were ruled by Saddam? I did not (i note that, in my humble opinion, his children were likely to be even worse tyrants than he was). .  .

One possibly interesting note. According to the recent issue of Time magazine (19 Dec), most Iraqis that are not in the Sunni region: 1) think they are better off now than they were before the invasion; 2) think the invasion was a good thing. The Sunnis, of course, strongly disagree.

Jay-Jay,

It was WTH who introduced the comparison of the American Revolution to our occupation of Iraq.  I was just following with that ancient method of falsifiability to which you profess such admiration yet display such incompetence in utilizing or recognizing.

Are you educable?

wolfie,

I always maintain a degree of hope for all people.  Even you.

Ah, typical lb misdirection.

You must have studied under Randi?

“I didn’t start it!”

Yet, you, not whattheheck, introduced the comparison of the Redcoats and the circumstance they operated, with the American troops currently in Iraq.

Do you stand behind your own words or not?

Are you capable of educating?

To educate,

whattheheck was comparing the trials and tribulations of the early American republic, as they gave birth to American democracy, with the near-identical trials and tribulations of the Iraqis as they struggle to create a democratic society.

You, not whattheheck, made the flippant comparison between the Redcoats leaving after being defeated at Yorktown, with Amercian troops in Iraq.

Please don’t make me use the “disingenuous” argument again…

A rant.

I am completely mystified by how certain people are of the opinions they hold and espouse. The war was just. The war was immoral. The war was necessary. The war was all about corporate profits and stealing oil. Etc.

I am simply unable to think in such terms. To be so very certain. When i look at complex events, i try to see them from as many points of view as i can. Which leads more to a grey scale point of view, almost devoid of black and white. To a large extent, both the right and left eschew such “wishy washy” thinking, preferring to cast issues as good/bad right/wrong moral/immoral.

Surely even those against the war must be able to see the good that comes from it? And equally surely, those for the war must lament the bad that results from it?

I wonder - is it this certainty that allows posters to call each other rude names, adding nothing to the debate other than venom? Is it too hard to be polite and respectful, or is it that the mere act of disagreement on subjects like the war cause us to believe that those people are simply not deserving respect?

Is there not a contradiction between believing in pacifism, whilst calling others morons or worse? Or is this simply stating *obvious* facts (to disagree is to be a moron?)?

Anyway, i come here to read the opinions of others, in order to understand those who hold different views from me. I wish all of you well. Merry Christmas and happy holidays!

end of rant

wolfie,

Newsday has a decidedly different take on that Time poll:

[url="http://tinyurl.com/8njlm" ] President Bush is making selective use of an opinion poll when he tells people that Iraqis are increasingly upbeat.

The same poll that indicated a majority of Iraqis believe their lives are going well also found a majority expressing opposition to the presence of U.S. forces, and less than half saying Iraq is better off now than before the war.[/url]

There’s an old blues line that may give one some insight into perceived Iraqi optimism, “been down so long, down looks like up to me”

That little experiment didn’t turn out so well.
<a href="http://tinyurl.com/8njlm> HERE’S </a> the link.

Sheesh!

luminous beauty - from the link you posted, it is not clear to me that the two polls are all that different. There is, however, one striking difference: Newsday did not break down the results by region, as the Time poll did.

It seems likely to me that the Sunnis are the “losers” in this conflict, the Kurds and Shiites the “winners”. Thus the Sunnis, having lost their privileged status, are unhappy, whilst the formerly oppressed Kurds and Shiites are quite a bit more upbeat. Is this controversial?

Yes, Jay-Jay, I stand by my words.  Your arguments are trivial.

wolfie, there are no shades of grey between the danger of being blown to bits by implacable combatants and living peacefully in one’s own home.  Only the comfortable can afford to make abstract generalities of issues of life and death.

It’s the same poll, wolfie.  You were making false general conclusions.  Now you want to be more specific.  OK, but why don’t you admit your error?

luminous beauty - “there are no shades of grey between the danger of being blown to bits by implacable combatants and living peacefully in one’s own home.”

I do not disagree. However, i do not think i would classify living under the rule of Saddam and UN sanctions as “living peacefully in one’s own home”, at least for a significant fraction of the Iraqi population. . .

I think your quote above could apply to any US soldier sent to WWII (that is, he left his peaceful home at the risk of being blown to bits). Do you agree?

wolf - “One possibly interesting note. According to the recent issue of Time magazine (19 Dec), most Iraqis that are not in the Sunni region: 1) think they are better off now than they were before the invasion; 2) think the invasion was a good thing. The Sunnis, of course, strongly disagree.”

luminous beauty - “It’s the same poll, wolfie.  You were making false general conclusions.  Now you want to be more specific. “

I would be happy to admit my error. Can you point it out for me? (Perhaps you missed the part “most Iraqis that are NOT in the Sunni region” (emphasis added)?

wolfie, I, for one do not shy away from moral arguments.  Nor do I easily tolerate sophisties that cloak themselves in moral terms.  You can put that in your pipe and smoke it.

lb,

Well, I’m glad we have come full circle, though without progress.

So,

Are you comparing 18th Century Britian in America with our troops in Iraq today? The parallels are so uncanny that I don’t see even one.

Are your words indefensible? And please, the mock condescending attitude won’t work this time. You drew a parallel that no one understands. Or do we two-step and swing the other direction now?

wolfie, Sorry, I missed your qualification.  Nonetheless, you would exclude the Sunnis from ‘most Iraqis’.  Rather selective and disingenuous, don’t you think?

luminous beauty - “ Nor do I easily tolerate sophisties that cloak themselves in moral terms.”

You have completely lost me. What are you (sophisties, moral terms?) referring to here?

luminous beauty - “Nonetheless, you would exclude the Sunnis from ‘most Iraqis’.  Rather selective and disingenuous, don’t you think?”

This is NOT my intent. In fact, i stated: “The Sunnis, of course, strongly disagree.”.

Excluding Sunnis from ‘most Iraqis’ still leaves 80% of the Iraqi population.

No, that is not selective nor disingenuous.

Merely more detailed than the less detailed stats you have been quoting.

Iraqis are three different populations. It is not inaccurate to say, Iraqis blame America whilst saying in the same breath Iraqis are grateful for the freedom from the Sunni rule that the Americans have provided. wolf is absolutely proper is qualifying the poll data.

As I have argued with David in Levin’s article ‘To Leave or Not To Leave’,

David,

I have quoted numerous polls here and at other ITT topics that indicate that, while the Iraqis would like the American troops to leave as soon as possible, which is certainly reasonable, the Iraqis themselves mostly do not believe now is the time.

That there is animosity and resentment to be sure, particularly among the Sunnis, does not change that fact.

“sophisties” are everyone who disagrees with lb…

Jay-Jay,

I didn’t draw any comparisons between the Redcoats and American Occupation Forces.  What I did say is that our collective struggle to establish a democracy did not begin or end with the Revolutionary War or the establishing of the Constitution.  The same will be true for the Iraqis.  If you can’t understand it is not my problem.

If I may presume to a didactic function.  Your argument rested on your characterization of WTH’s analogy as being ‘near identical’ and my (erroneously assumed) analogy as being ‘flippant’ without any evidence but your own opinion.  Supremely trivial.

Jay-Jay, you completely forgot the Turkmen and Assyrians, not to mention those Iraqis who might have a more nationalist or internationalist and secular POV.  But I guess they being even less than 20% are just too insignificant for you to consider.

It is of some limited interest to compare the differences of distinct segments of a population.  However by excluding one segment from a general conclusion about the whole you are just going along with the divide and conquer strategy, and again, being disingenuous.

I infer from what you are saying the US should leave sooner rather than later, nes pas?

lb,

Thank you. That makes more sense.

However, whattheheck did not say that our democracy was in full place immediately after those events either. What was being argued was that Iraqi democracy is still a work in progress, and the long and laborous efforts of the fledgling American Republic was an apt comparision. To say that it wasn’t over until it is over, as you did, is merely repeating what has been argued by those supporting the American foreign policy in Iraq.

Now, I would not argue that repeating such an obvious comparison is not trivial, but our oft mutual misunderstandings would be greatly diminished with a little mutual honesty.

And respect.

lb,

again you presume too much. Maybe we should just start to argue our own POV and let others post their own.

Your characterization aside, allow me to quote three statistics that every one knows:

Iraqi Shiite - 60%
Iraqi Sunni - 20%
Iraqi Kurd - 20%

60 + 20 = 80

In the case of the Iraqis, it is more than just limited interest to “segment” the Iraqi population.

These three populations are distinct populations. What would be disingenuous is to characterize and stereotype the entire population by refering to merely one.

You infer wrong. As the argument rages across America, the dividing line is between those who believe in a timed withdrawal (sooner or later) and those who believe in one driven by events and necessity.

I believe in the later.

Jay-Jay,

Go back and re-read what has been written and it might make a little more sense.  And you might even discern my actual points of contention.

I’m glad you agree in principle to honesty.  Now if only you can find in yourself the capacity.  No disrespect meant.  Just constructive criticism.

Actually, Jay the difference between Sunni and Shia Arabs is historically not all that distinct.  Particularily in Iraq, the wedge driven between them is mostly a result of US policy going back GWI. Bush I first encouraging the Shia to rise up against Saddam, and then, not only failing to support them in that uprising, but allowing Saddam full access to ruthlessly put it down.

I’m reposting this as a refutation to that too convenient breakdown of the Iraqi populations:

Shia are definately not a tribe. Shia and Sunni are the two main sects of Islam. You were correct in assuming that most of southern Iraqis are. Shia-they are. But tribes in Iraq can be both sects of Islam, and some of the bigger tribes are both Shia and Sunni. In fact, there are 10s of thousands of marriages in Iraq are between Shia and Sunni.

Dahr

What was being argued was that Iraqi democracy is still a work in progress, and the long and laborous efforts of the fledgling American Republic was an apt comparision.

Iraq is a work “in progress” for and by whom? People in other countries are not our tinker toys for nation building. Had the Iraqi people asked, I would think differently, perhaps; but still, I think the fact that the U.S. doesn’t require a referendum or as much as a straw vote before spending our money and mobilizing our troops to “liberate” a nation after declaring the intention of disarming it tells me that our little experiment in democracy is so far from fruition that we shouldn’t be “spreading” it.

Clearly, I failed to delineate here---The quote in italics after the name “Dahr” belongs to Jay Cline. Just a typos Jay. Sorry ‘bout that.

wolfie,

Of course the Sunni population is massively against the occupation.  So much so that it effects the majority opinion.  Otherwise you would have no need to exclude them.  Perhaps you are being less than honest with what your intentions are.  Is it to find a dialectic that can bring us to concensus or is it to nail my sorry ass to the wall?

That question goes for you too Jay, WTH.

luminous beauty - i have no desire to exclude any part of the population of Iraq, for the purposes of the poll i quoted or any other reason. In fact i explicitly included them when i stated: “The Sunnis, of course, strongly disagree.”.

If i were to state that blacks vote overwhelmingly democratic, would that be excluding other Americans? How about if i say that people who make more than $100K/yr vote overwhelming republican, would that be excluding (i do not know if the latter is true, it is meant merely as an example of the use of demographics)? Is the use of demographics objectionable?

I prefer more information to less. Thus knowing the demographics of who wants what, whether here in the US, there in Iraq, or even in the Himba tribe of southern west Africa can be informative to me (i have been wanting to work in a Himba reference ever since i saw those wonderful people on a broadcast a few days ago!).

It is worth pondering why the demographics in Iraq are the way they are, or so i believe. Of course, the answer is pretty obvious. . .

Had the Iraqi people asked, I would think differently, perhaps

um, they did.

Repeatedly.

Clinton ignored them

Again, and for the last time. Sunnis and Shiite have both excommunicated each other, both refers to the other as heretics, both have vowed to exterminate each other.

That Saddam used the difference (that some claim is no difference) to consolidate his secular power by using his Sunni heritage is important.

To infer they are mere kissing cousins is, well, I have promised not to start throwing mud, so I won’t.

And as far as the work in progress, it is the Iraqis doing the work.

lb,

honesty and respect are two way streets. I am glad you see the value. I just wish you could see the mutual value.

Jay,

When you begin to cop to your own lies and distortions, and cease to project them onto me, then we might have some grounds for mutuality.  Begin with the obvious falsehoods you use in the post of 5:20pm.  You are not merely misinformed, you make absolute truths out of partial ones.

wolf,

When you say ‘most Iraqis excepting those in the Sunni regions’, you are explicitly excluding most of the Sunnis from most Iraqis.  ipso facto.  It is a distortion.  It is putting a spin on the fact that most Iraqis are not supportive of the US invasion including substantial portions of the non-Sunni population.
Quit playing games.

Jay, can you give us a reference for your statement that the Sunnis and Shiite have “excommunicated” each other? I’m not asking to be pedantic, I read two to six hours a day (no television) and I’m not much of a secretary or librarian, so I don’t expect opinions to come with bibliographies. Fair is fair.

But, since you are so adamant on this point, I would like to know where you got this information. Last I heard, Shia leaders asked their followers to stand down and not attack Sunnis who were going to vote.

Is this “excommunication” something that happened in the last week or so?

Nobody says they were kissing cousins, but a source that I personally, think of as reliable has said that they marry. I’ve also heard an Iraqi quoted as saying “What?! You think I’m going to attack my wife?!” Somehow this makes more sense to me than a radical and thorough “excommunication”.

BTW, “excommunication” is usually a formal procedure, is it not?  How is their newly elected government going to function if the Shia and Sunni are “excommunicated”? Will we have to bomb them into agreement now or just eliminate one of the groups for the sake of concensus. 

P.S. Chalabi and a bunch of expats in the INC asked---the people of Iraq did not ask us to bomb their cities and towns into rubble so that they could begin the long hard struggle for “democracy”. Hmmm. Dead children/democracy, dead parents/democracy, dead self/democracy....

O.K. democracy!

And democracy is so absolutely, miraculously, marvelously, splendid, that we’ll have an order of cancer to go with it and some mutant babies. Thanks America for destroying our country and using it as a dumping ground for your radioactive waste. Thank God (our name for God is “Allah”, like the spanish name for “cat” is “gato") for rounding up our men and boys and torturing them! Thank you for dumping white phosphorous on Fallujah. With our newfound democracy we will struggle until we kiss your feet by teaching us democracy the only way you know how---through indiscriminate force and massive ordinance.  Thank you for the cluster mines. Thanks for the strafing. Thanks for the tanks with insults written on the side that roll through our towns and cities. Thank you for incinerating families at roadblocks. Thanks for destroying our infrastructure and giving money to Halliburton not to fix anything. Thanks for destroying our hospitals and not footing the bill for the injuries you’ve caused and the disease that is a direct result of the shambles our nation is in.

Democracy is so perfect and wonderful that if half the world’s population must be murdered to achieve it then it is worth it.

Signed, the hand-full of Iraqis that still like being under assault on behalf of removing Saddam Hussein from power or any other excuse parading as “reason”.

And before you go off on your little diddy about “sarcastic” remarks, you might want to look at your little sanitized version of the war and ask yourself what you omit.

Thank you, Wiley.

Mama scold.  I’m getting tired of being polite.

Be polite; write diplomatically; even in a declaration of war one observes the rules of politeness.
Otto von Bismarck

Wolf,

You said and I agree,
“When i look at complex events, i try to see them from as many points of view as i can.”

When I put myself in the position of the President & Commander in Chief after 9/11 and consider what I would have done had I been he, I am pretty sure I would have reacted similarly.

I am willing to assume there is information only the president and top military personnel have which is not and should not be public.

After reading the long exchange between several people here, I am truly thankful Luminous Beauty was not our first woman President of the United States.

Merry Christmas to all and to all a Happy New Year.
(Feel free to think “Happy Holiday” in place of Merry Christmas if you prefer.) Machs nichts.

whattheheck - I remember the day when the war with Iraq began. I was completely amazed that we were actually going to war, and had many doubts as to the threat Iraq might pose to us. However, i had a Palestinian friend who had been constantly inundating me with the horrors of the UN/US sanctions, so i thought/hoped that the invasion would ease the plight of the Iraqi people. I remain hopeful, for their sake.

Me, i am truly thankful that I am not the Prez (as i imagine are many of the posters here!).

Merry Christmas! And may freedom spread across the world. . .

I am willing to assume there is information only the president and top military personnel have which is not and should not be public--WTH

Sorry, I’m not so willing to give up my necessary right in a democracy to informed consent.  It is refreshing, though, to see you declare so explicitly your willing obeisance to tyrannical rule.  It makes everything you’ve said so clear.

Bye the bye, it is impossible for me to ever become the first woman president of the US, as you have assumed incorrectly my gender.  Just an object lesson in the possible error one risks when one assumes (even more likely for assumptions based on one’s willing ignorance).

Merry Christmas and Namaste!

whattheheck,

For the record, it is okay to ignore lb’s gender bending trick. S/He seems to feel that it is illuminative of her/his opponent’s stereotypes.

What s/he fails to realize is that, far from stereotypical male dominance, it is just as likely, in these times, that with a name so deliberately construed to confuse genders, those of us who respect the other gender and their hard won equal rights would rather risk falling for her/his puerile trap than inadvertently reinforcing historical gender prejudices that says a woman is incapable of intelligent thought or debate. Not that lb’s debates are that intelligent, but s/he seems to think so.

The usual suspects again, seeing only trolls.

What is telling is the stereotypes and prejudices of the bender…

Jay,

When you begin to cop to your own lies and distortions, and cease to project them onto me, then we might have some grounds for mutuality.  Begin with the obvious falsehoods you use in the post of 5:20pm.  You are not merely misinformed, you make absolute truths out of partial ones.

uhm....

lb,

Unless you and wileywitch are one in the same, the 5:20pm post was so obviously in direct response to ww’s 4:22pm post, not anything you posted.

Perhaps you should take your own advice, nez pas?

lb, ww in the 6:20pm post seemed to understand that.

ww,

the excommunication and charges of heretics goes back hundreds of years. I will have to get back to you one that one, though.

what ditty?

Jay;

Perhaps I’ve been too harsh in my use of the word ‘lying’.  Would the term ‘dissembling’ be more acceptable?

When you get back from your research expedition we can discuss it.

Not at all, lb.

Though I am becoming concerned. Despite your obvious predilication towards adolescent hijinks, I fear you may be suffering from some form of senility.

By ‘lying’, what do you mean? The only reference to ‘lying’ anywhere within this posting is your admonishment against fools who never question authority but sycophantically echo whatever they are told by scurrilous lying demagogues.

As I do not disagree with that, I certainly take no umbrage whether you call demagogues liars or dissemblers. That you choose to slander people with such patent nonsense is entirely up to you.

Of course, I am merely offering this as a little constructive criticism. I pray you don’t take offense.

Jay and LB,

Jay has it here as I intended.

“...whattheheck did not say that our democracy was in full place immediately after those events either. What was being argued was that Iraqi democracy is still a work in progress, and the long and laborious efforts of the fledgling American Republic was an apt comparison.”

Just sitting back and watching this exchange between the two of you is perhaps instructive. I can’t help wondering how much communication goes astray when written as opposed to spoken face to face. The lack of sound with all the nuances of the human voice, body language and the advantage of knowing a person under other circumstances and topics can easily lead to hasty conclusions and misunderstanding.

Dealing with theory and hypothetical situations is fine for passing the time interestingly.  I suspect if we were together and faced with an imminent crisis our actions may not be all that different. It is much easier to maintain our prejudices at arm’s length than against a person you’ve come to know by name, personality and shared events.
-------------------------

Just to try to make my position clear on the war —
I believe…

• It is the most serious threat to this nation in my lifetime. (b:1938)

• This seriousness has not been properly portrayed to the nation and the world.

• Unless the entire free world unites the threat cannot be removed. (containment not an option)

This is not a contest between our intellects. If the threat is NOT real, then the main benefit is having gotten rid of Saddam. And yes, the cost is high. If, however, the threat is real the cost will have been less than doing nothing. Even then there are no guarantees since we can still ALL lose.

-------------------------------

As LB stated, “...the wedge driven between them is mostly a result of US policy going back GWI. Bush I first encouraging the Shia to rise up against Saddam, and then, not only failing to support them in that uprising, but allowing Saddam full access to ruthlessly put it down.”

IMO a huge, unforgivable mistake. But… for us to pull out now (we must deal with the NOW only) would lead to the same kind of mass killing and completely destroy U.S. credibility.

Jay-Jay;

You’re above arguments about polling numbers are blatant and egregious.  By throwing out data to obtain a result that is consistent with your opinion, you are committing a fraud, plain and simple.  If this was the only case it could be dismissed as mere ignorance, however you consistently argue without the slightest concern for either facts or reason.

Even when you on the rare occasion present an empirically true fact, the reasoning you employ in determining the significance of that fact is invariably turned on its head and twisted topsy-turvy.  Like saying for example:

Socrates is a man.
Socrates is mortal.
Ergo:  All men are mortal

Even though all statements may be true, the reasoning is false because the conclusion does not follow.  This is precisely the kind of argument that you would have to employ in your contention that Sunni and Shia Moslems are eternal and implacable foes.  (That conclusion is not true, bye the bye.)

When I showed you with plain language your errors in your mistaken interpretation of the use of the word libertarian on the politicalcompass site, carefully answering each dodge you threw out six ways from Sunday, after offering you a reasonable way out of the dilemma into which you were painting yourself, after editing and posting the complete relevant back and forth, so it could be easily seen, did you admit to your error?  Not a bit.  You said “I think lb has just proved I am a troll” and then left thinking your specious opinion was somehow still justified.

In the same discussion, when I showed you chapter and verse how you were using a straw-man fallacy, did you cop to it in the slightest.  No, you proceeded with a scurrilous, baseless attempt to accuse me of making a straw-man argument. 

This is not even a plausible rhetorical argument.  It is a demonstration of what is known in psychology as transference.  This is reflected in spades by the above post, wherein you try, in a parodical fashion, to use my words against me.  It is the equivalent to the childish argument ‘I know you are, but what am I?’.  This kind of projection in children is understandable because of their limited moral and mental development.  In an adult it is, when habitual, a clear symptom of pathology.

As the twelve-steppers say, “The first step in overcoming a problem, is admitting you have a problem”.

I have not been childish in my rhetorical undermining of your opinions, but merely taking a child-like pleasure in pointing out the absurdities inherent in them.  Since you then or since have not shown the slightest interest in engaging in a sober and rational discussion, but instead create the superficial pose of one who is serious, I really have little option other than letting your intentional falsehoods stand.  In the interest of seeking what is true and good, I cannot in good moral conscience allow that.

WTH:

I fail to see how piling unforgivable mistake on top of unforgivable mistake upon unforgivable mistake is defending US credibility.

You illustrate so transparently Wilde’s observation that “consistency is the hob-goblin of the small minds.”

It’s not at all clear to me that immediate US withdrawal would result in any more bloodshed than is occurring NOW.  (I do think it important to examine the future consequences of present and past actions.  It’s called mental maturity)

The world is getting a quite different picture than what either the Pres. or the relatively compliant mainstream press are saying.  HERE is a view from the Iraqi street that puts your arm chair speculations to shame.  If you guys are capable of shame?

That’s quite all right, lb. I have made it clear in other discussions that devolve into “my poll vs your poll” argument that polls alone are not enough to establish facts. As I am sure you must be aware, they give a sense of opinion only, and as your dear friend admonishes quite often, opinions are not facts. Certainly they have their uses, when not abused.

I do find it curious though that you so vehemently object to the “correctness” of polling data that counters your arguments, but all you can offer is an article with such patently biased anecdotal information.

But that too is ok. I do like your Logic 101 lesson. It is quite clear. Let’s try another. I say Shiite and Sunni have a history of animosity. You conclude I am asserting that I have proclaimed they are implacable and eternal enemies and proceed to create a fantasy opponent to argue with.

Incredibly amusing! Thanks for the chuckle!

So, I guess we will just let that argument rest on its own merits. I would greatly dislike embarrassing you further, though I do continue to advise you take your own counsel. The 12-step process is indeed a good place to start.

The facts of the one poll under discussion are the numbers of that poll.  It is not my poll vs. your poll.  It is not a matter of opinion it is a matter of uncontroversial fact.  It is the same poll and it is the same numbers. once again blatant data-mining, removing data that do not agree with your desired conclusion is FRAUD, plain and simple. If you were presenting a study using such conclusions to any legitimate scientific body you would suffer the most severe sanctions.
Exactly.

So you are backing off the argument that The Shia and Sunni consider each the other ex-communicated heretics, in a global historical sense and only that maybe there are instances in history when Shia and Sunni may have been at each others throats.  That is good. That is reasonable.  But it leaves you with no argument against Wiley’s and my contention that, in general, the differences between Sunni and Shia globally, historically and in particular existing communities are not so great.  So why defend such a weakened useless redoubt?  You are only salving your narcissistic pride, with another display of squalid dissembling.

So you have no other response

LB,

What I said was in response to your statement of our cutting out after the First Gulf War.

“...encouraging the Shia to rise up against Saddam, and then, not only failing to support them in that uprising, but allowing Saddam full access to ruthlessly put it down.”

My reply:

“IMO a huge, unforgivable mistake. But… for us to pull out now (we must deal with the NOW only) would lead to the same kind of mass killing and completely destroy U.S. credibility.”

While you have a broad vocabulary (no pun intended) you do seem to have either a problem with comprehension or retention. If you read the above slowly you may discover that I am proposing NOT to repeat (a consistency) the pull-out.

I suspect you were already composing a retort when you could have simply been accepting that there is a possibility someone has reason to hold a differing opinion.

You stated, “It’s not at all clear to me that immediate US withdrawal would result in any more bloodshed than is occurring NOW.”

Commanders must act in real time, even when “unclear” what the result may be.  Not acting the result is also unclear. They don’t have the luxury of days, weeks, months, to reflect or the advice of a committee input.  Likewise even in a longer time frame the outcome is always speculative.

Even worse they often have more than one life or death decision to make at the same time.

Then you added, “(I do think it important to examine the future consequences of present and past actions.  It’s called mental maturity)”

This is exactly what my comments were doing — Based on what happened when we left too early thousands were slaughtered. If we do it again I see no reason it would not happen again. In addition it would give the terrorist leaders wonderful recruiting material. “Blow yourself up — chase an American Army away.”

Unlike you, who blame each Iraqi death on the U.S. I see the suicide bombers and those planting the IEDs as killers, NOT patriots.

Finally, i must admit you have changed my mind about one of my opinions. I no longer believe if faced with an imminent crisis our actions would be similar. While many of us would choose to act against a threat, you would be attempting to skewer it with your sharp tongue. (No match for an AK-47.)

P.S. By the way, I believe your quote about consistency/small minds is by Ralph Waldo Emerson. Wilde was out having his hair done at the time.

WTH;

You’re right, Emerson said it first.  However, Emerson was dead before Wilde was in an English prison for the crime of being himself.

You say:

Based on what happened when we left too early thousands were slaughtered. If we do it again I see no reason it would not happen again. In addition it would give the terrorist leaders wonderful recruiting material. “Blow yourself up — chase an American Army away.

First, we really never left. No fly zones, sanctions, UN inspections.  US troops were still on the ground in Iraq when the US gave Saddam permission to use helicopter gun-ships to suppress the uprisings. 

As to the second. Isn’t the current situation a recruiting tool for ‘terrorists’?  Isn’t the current situation a training ground for insurgents seeking to kill Americans?  I cannot see how depriving them of these real world conditions is going to increase their credibility or capability. 

All your speculations and assumptions seem founded on beliefs based on opinion, circling the facts without ever touching them. 

You say:

Unlike you, who blame each Iraqi death on the U.S.  I see the suicide bombers and those planting the IEDs as killers, NOT patriots

I repeat this quote from Albert Camus.

In the end, man is not entirely guilty — he did not start history. Nor is he wholly innocent — he continues it.

Read it carefully.  If your comprehension is up to par, you might be able to infer that I am saying there is plenty of blame to go around, but playing the blame game is more heat than light.  An affective diversion from the pursuit of understanding.  I believe this is a moderate position.

Your opinion on the Iraqi resistance is only of interest to you.  What I would have you consider is if they believe they are patriots.

You really seem a little overboard in your defense of force.
Do you really think pointing a gun in my face would make me more agreeable to your point of view?

Bye the bye, that has happened to me more than once. I’ve also broken up more than one fight between people wielding fists, knives and/or guns. Without killing anybody.

LB,

War is about force. Where Al Camus places what percentage of blame is irrelevant.  In a combat situation poking a gun in your face would have nothing to do with attempting to change your mind — just your longevity.

I have no illusions of ever changing your mind. The only reason for my comments lately has been due to Jay having pointed out that other people may be reading this stuff and open to more than just the usual anti-U.S. propaganda generally packing this site.

Yes WTH, your illusions are incompatible with changing minds.  Before you can change a mind you must first begin to understand it.  You should begin with examining your own mind.  It’s never too late.  It is apparent to me that you mindlessly cling to core beliefs you vainly desire to be fixed and absolute. Any new idea outside of what you already believe you can only interpret as a threat.  Like Jay, you put on the mask of reason and moderation, but the only compromise you offer is an ignoring and confused middle ground between the search for what is true and accepting pleasing lies.  (Pleasing to you.  They horrify me) Tres Mephisto. 

You have not the foggiest idea what Camus is saying or I am saying.  Only that you disagree because when you come down to it all you believe or understand is that your side must win no matter what.  Lies, trickery, force, coercion, intimidation, corruption.  None of it matters as long as you and your tribe gets its way.  Objective reason is not something you can tolerate, much less understand.

To say open and free dissent and criticism of government policy are anti-U.S. is about as anti-U.S. a statement as is possible.  Shame on you!

Namaste.

LB,

A great idea!  Why don’t you go over and join the Quakers?

Surely, the Iraqi “patriots” you favor will follow your objective reasoning.

You must know deep in your heart they would never resort to lies, trickery, force, coersion, intimidation, or corruption, so you will be able to get them to abandon THEIR “core beliefs” and we can all live pacifistically ever after.

Question: Do they remove a woman’s head covering, before they chop, or just remove everything in one fell swoop?

Merry Christmas, WTH;

“Blessed be ye poor; for yours is the kingdom of God. Blessed are ye that hunger now; for ye shall be filled. Blessed are ye that weep now; for ye shall laugh.”

“But woe unto you that are rich! For ye have received your consolation. Woe unto you that are full! For ye shall hunger. Woe unto you that laugh now! For ye shall mourn and weep.”

“Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth; but I say unto you: Resist not evil, but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloak also. And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain. Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away.”

“Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour and hate thine enemy.But I say unto you: Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you and persecute you. Thus you may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust. For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? Do not even publicans the same? And if you salute your brethren only, what do you more than others? Do not even publicans so?”

“Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon the earth, where moth and rust doth corrupt, and where thieves break through and steal; but lay up for yourselves treasure in heaven, where neither moth nor rust corrupt, and where thieves do not break through nor steal. For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.”

“No man can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one and love the other; or else he will hold to the one and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon. Therefore I say unto you: Take no thought for your life, what ye shall eat, or what ye shall drink; nor yet for your body, what ye shall put on. Is not life more than meat, and the body more than raiment?”

“Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgement ye judge, ye shall be judged; and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.”

“Therefore, all things whatsoever ye would that men should do unto you, do ye even so to them; for this is the law and the prophets.”

LB,
Selah

selah salaam aleichem, comrade.

May peace be upon you.

Merry Christmas Luminous Beauty and What the Heck and Jay.

“Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men.”

This poem was written by a Marine.  The following is his request. I think it is reasonable.....

PLEASE. Would you do me the kind favor of sending this to as many people as you can? Christmas will be coming soon and some credit is due to our U.S. service men and women for our being able to celebrate, these festivities. Let’s try in this small way to pay a tiny bit of what we owe. Make people stop and think of our heroes, living and dead, who sacrificed themselves for us. Please, do your small part to plant this small seed.

A Christmas Story

TWAS THE NIGHT BEFORE CHRISTMAS,
HE LIVED ALL ALONE,
IN A ONE BEDROOM HOUSE MADE OF
PLASTER AND STONE.

I HAD COME DOWN THE CHIMNEY
WITH PRESENTS TO GIVE,
AND TO SEE JUST WHO
IN THIS HOME DID LIVE.

I LOOKED ALL ABOUT,
A STRANGE SIGHT I DID SEE,
NO TINSEL, NO PRESENTS,
NOT EVEN A TREE.

NO STOCKING BY MANTLE,
JUST BOOTS FILLED WITH SAND,
ON THE WALL HUNG PICTURES
OF FAR DISTANT LANDS.

WITH MEDALS AND BADGES,
AWARDS OF ALL KINDS,
A SOBER THOUGHT
CAME THROUGH MY MIND.

FOR THIS HOUSE WAS DIFFERENT,
IT WAS DARK AND DREARY,
I FOUND THE HOME OF A SOLDIER,
ONCE I COULD SEE CLEARLY.

THE SOLDIER LAY SLEEPING,
SILENT, ALONE,
CURLED UP ON THE FLOOR
IN THIS ONE BEDROOM HOME.
THE FACE WAS SO GENTLE,
THE ROOM IN SUCH DISORDER,
NOT HOW I PICTURED
A UNITED STATES SOLDIER.

WAS THIS THE HERO
OF WHOM I’D JUST READ?
CURLED UP ON A PONCHO,
THE FLOOR FOR A BED?

I REALIZED THE FAMILIES
THAT I SAW THIS NIGHT,
OWED THEIR LIVES TO THESE SOLDIERS
WHO WERE WILLING TO FIGHT.
SOON ROUND THE WORLD,
THE CHILDREN WOULD PLAY,
AND GROWNUPS WOULD CELEBRATE
A BRIGHT CHRISTMAS DAY
.
THEY ALL ENJOYED FREEDOM
EACH MONTH OF THE YEAR,
BECAUSE OF THE SOLDIERS,
LIKE THE ONE LYING HERE.

I COULDN’T HELP WONDER
HOW MANY LAY ALONE,
ON A COLD CHRISTMAS EVE
IN A LAND FAR FROM HOME
.
THE VERY THOUGHT
BROUGHT A TEAR TO MY EYE,
I DROPPED TO MY KNEES
AND STARTED TO CRY.

THE SOLDIER AWAKENED
AND I HEARD A ROUGH VOICE,
“SANTA DON’T CRY,
THIS LIFE IS MY CHOICE;

I FIGHT FOR FREEDOM,
I DON’T ASK FOR MORE,
MY LIFE IS, MY GOD,
MY COUNTRY, MY CORPS.”

THE SOLDIER ROLLED OVER
AND DRIFTED TO SLEEP,
I COULDN’T CONTROL IT,
I CONTINUED TO WEEP.

I KEPT WATCH FOR HOURS,
SO SILENT AND STILL
AND WE BOTH SHIVERED
FROM THE COLD NIGHT’S CHILL.

I DIDN’T WANT TO LEAVE
ON THAT COLD, DARK, NIGHT,
THIS GUARDIAN OF HONOR
SO WILLING TO FIGHT.

THEN THE SOLDIER ROLLED OVER,
WITH A VOICE SOFT AND PURE,
WHISPERED, “CARRY ON SANTA,
IT’S CHRISTMAS DAY, ALL IS SECURE.”

ONE LOOK AT MY WATCH,
AND I KNEW HE WAS RIGHT.
“MERRY CHRISTMAS MY FRIEND,
AND TO ALL A GOOD NIGHT.”

For your marine, WTH;

Christmas in the Trenches
words & music by John McCutcheon 

My name is Francis Tolliver, I come from Liverpool,
Two years ago the war was waiting for me after school.
To Belgium and to Flanders to Germany to here
I fought for King and country I love dear.
‘Twas Christmas in the trenches where the frost so bitter hung,
The frozen fields of France were still, no Christmas song was sung,
Our families back in England were toasting us that day,
Their brave and glorious lads so far away.