You are correct. And, if they will all sit down and shut-up for five minutes, we might have a chance to hear them out.
A man standing in a crowded room, screaming “I love you!” at the top of his lungs will still be regarded as mad.
Originally posted by Elucidator
While I agree with you on most of your postings, we have read different surveys. Though surveys are highly insightful - they are easily skewed. However, while anger at the perceived aggressor is natural, I beleive that surveys purporting the wishes of Iraqis to find a peaceful resolution are likely more accurate.
It is equally accepted that the majority of Iraqis want the bloodshed to stop and a peaceful political process to begin…
“Majority Rule” has often been condemned by some arguments referring to the popularity of the 3rd Reich during WWII, but is does not bear up against the fact that the majority of Germans did not support Hitler or the SS. They did not, however, applaud in unison as our tanks rolled into Berlin.
Having a majority is not automatically going to ensure order or equality or even basic human rights, but if the majority of people would rather have peaceful discourse than bloody insurrection, we owe it to ourselves and to them (if history indeed shows our initial actions were less than justified) to create an environment conducive to such discourse. To accomplish this, we obviously require more troops, American, Polish, British, whichever. Hell! Even the UN is withholding vital personnel and therefor invaluable assistance to the Iraqis until the situation is better stabilized.
What is your justification for the claim that the majority of Germans didn’t upport Hitler?
Especially considering that the Nazi party came to power after a free election.
History shows that military action does resolve some disputes and may even benefit the world as a whole when proper use of force is applied.
Germany, I might add, is now a peaceful, culturally rich country with scenic mountain vistas, a vital economy and (according to Time Magazine), interestingly enough an aging, declining population. So much for eugenics!
How many Americans voted in the last presidential election?
Less than 30%
Has it occurred to you the results are not necessarily contradictory? The same Iraqi who answers “yes” to “Do you want a peaceful resolution?” might also answer “yes” to “Do you condone terrorism directed at U.S. troops?” – and perceive no inconsistency.
Exactly - I must not have been precise in my statement. :smack: Basically, they can (strongly) resent us being there and still want a peaceful resolution.
Sorry, no argument here 
Oh, good heavens, No. 
I’m a Republican and even I don’t believe that government sponsored poll.
I will concede that my source is just as trustworthy. Regardless, half the voters voted for Bush, half for Gore. Still not technically a majority.
And as you can see, I have located my smilies…
What have I been smoking?
I meant Kerry - I really did like the guy. I swear!
I don’t think that WWII resolved any disputes. The war resolved whose solutions were to be used. Things like the Marshall Plan rebuilt Europe economically and, I believe, led to the present, peaceful western Europe. The war left England in financial straits, France even worse off and Germany destitute. Had the Marshall Plan not come along it’s hard to see how today’s relative tranquillity would have been achieved.
Right. Don’t confuse your family’s rights and your willingness to give them away with my rights. They’re one in the same. If anything, you think you’d be working to get more rights, but you’re not. You’re working on curtailing them.
It was more calm under Saddam.
this should get you going
Nope, it’s still a majority, albeit a slim majority. After all, if Bush DIDN’T get a majority, he wouldn’t have been president.
Or are you going to argue that he got a plurality and take us farther from our original point?
Once again, I’m being called on a technocality.
60% (conceding to your poll over mine) of 100% of registeredvoters voted, voting damn near 50/50 split! Therefor, of the 100% of registered voters (who do not represent 100% of the U.S. population), 30% Of them voted for Bush and 30% for Kerry.
My point - increase troop deployment - is that the majority of Iraqis want and deserve peace. I still believe that we can give it to them whether or not we are fully justified in being there in the first place which is a whole other point, for Pete’s sake!
Well, actually Gore won the popular vote by 51,003,926 (48.4%) to 50,460,110 (47.9%) but that doesn’t count. He lost the Electoral College vote by 271 to 266 and that does count. Source
You know, that’s a good point and I forgot about that.
Iraquis want peace? Of course. Deserve peace? That’s for them to decide. The only logic that I can gather behind the statements are:
Iraqis had peace.
We stopped the peace.
They deserve peace.
We’ll restore peace.
Justified in being there? Not hardly. There was no reason to go there in the first place, and there’s still no reason to be there now. Can we give them peace? I don’t think we can. I think that for as long as we’re there, peace isn’t going to come about easily, if at all. I’m leaning towards “at all”.
If we could give them peace, it’d have been done, or at the very least, we’d see a clear way that it’s happened and how it’s shaping up. There are no such things.
What grounds do you have for this belief?
I appears to me that a group of determined Sunnis will continue to oppose the Shia dominated government and a group of determined Shi’ites, many of them in the Iraqi police and military, want to exterminate Sunnis. It also appears that both of these sides are able to recruit freely so as to make up their losses. So what do we do to bring peace?
Here, you and I agree. Yet, though it seems an excercise in futility, we owe it to ourelves and to those Iraqis who are taking the ball and running with it, namely those in the North to not only “Stay the course”, but to ensure a stable government with (heaven forbid) our own interests and those of Iraq’s neighbors met.
Since when do we put the interests of Tyrannical leaders like Saddam ahead of our own. Sure it was peaceful - speak your mind in old Iraq and you simply disappeared along with whoever was dumb enough to listen to your words. Some way to keep the peace.