Is constant criticism good for the U.S. - or Iraq?

[rjung]

Is it just me, or is Sam Stone’s OP just a recycled version of december’s “anti-Americanism” thread from two months ago?

[Spavined_Gelding]

*Originally posted by Guinastasia *
**Spavined Gelding-you mean Pinochet, and he was in Chile, not Peru.

**

Once more, I stand corrected.

[capacitor]

The main problem of the conduct of the war is that Bush effectively suppressed a very good reason to fight–of all the counrties, the Iraqi government was the only one laughing and cheering over 9/11, and also gave money publicly for the Palestinian martyrs’ families. That should be enough to get it on.

[Squink]

*Originally posted by capacitor *
The main problem of the conduct of the war is that Bush effectively suppressed a very good reason to fight–of all the counrties, the Iraqi government was the only one laughing and cheering over 9/11…

Got a cite for that ? All I turned up was this:

Iraqi deputy premier cables condolences to American charity organization on attacks victims

The Iraqi deputy Premier Tareq Aziz has expressed in a message he extended to the American “Voices in the Wilderness” which stands against the embargo imposed on Iraq his warmest condolences over the victims of the attacks targeted the US.

In a message he addressed to the representative of the organization Catherine Kelley Aziz said he conveys to members of the organization as American friends who sincerely consolidated with the Iraqi people, warmest condolences over the American victims of last Tuesday attacks.
-9/19/2001

here

[Boo_Boo_Foo]

*Originally posted by capacitor *
**The main problem of the conduct of the war is that Bush effectively suppressed a very good reason to fight–of all the counrties, the Iraqi government was the only one laughing and cheering over 9/11, and also gave money publicly for the Palestinian martyrs’ families. That should be enough to get it on. **

That’s rather a weak position if truth be known. Certainly, it pushes all the right buttons in terms of collective hurt ego’s seeking revenge, but most reasonable people would agree that to launch a war on another country simply because that country mocked you is a pretty piss weak case of reasoning.

[capacitor]

Have you read the second part of my statement? It is direct, prima facie evidence if not terrorism, at least deep sympathy to the act. The Palestinians are worthy only if they kill themselves. If I were a Pal, I would wonder WTF too.

[sailor]

*Originally posted by capacitor *
of all the counrties, the Iraqi government was the only one laughing and cheering over 9/11

Not true but, even if true, is absolutely no justification to invade.

*Originally posted by capacitor *
and also gave money publicly for the Palestinian martyrs’ families. That should be enough to get it on.

Are you serious? What kind of tortured and foolish logic are you using? You think any country doing something the US does not like can be invaded?

[Evil_One]

*Originally posted by Sam Stone *
** Does partisan one-upsmanship override the good of the country?

Or is this all about getting a Democrat elected next time, regardless of the consequences? **

For many on the left, the answers to both questions would seem to be a resounding “Yes”.

To be fair, many Republicans had the above goals in mind when Bill Clinton was President. I would have preferred almost anyone in office to that walking piece of lying smarmy crap.

That said, and back to the original point, anything the Bush Administration does in Iraq is going to to be nitpicked and have fault found with it in some way. We are leading up to a presidential election year…and the partisan frenzy will only get worse.

Your only defense is to educate yourself on the issues and keep an open mind. Then you can see who is full of crap and vote accordingly.

[Evil_One]

*Originally posted by Boo Boo Foo *
** The War on Terror in many respects is viewed by the non Western World as just another effort to prop up Western lifestyles and security at the expense of the non Western World.
**

This view is especially popular with religious and political leaders who want to use the west as a religious demon or as a scapegoat for their own problems and shortcomings. It’s also handy for trying to argue for communism or socialism.

*Originally posted by Boo Boo Foo *
**

My point here is this… the real goal, say 20 years or more down the line, is to help the poorest, the most disadvantaged peoples on this earth to implement the civil functions, and in particular, the quality education necessary for those countries to really embark upon a true Captain Comeback in regards to catching up with the Western World.

Sadly, this is a really, really long haul. It requires a sustained altruistic commitment on the part of the entire Western World which is beyond cheap polticial positioning for an entire generation or more.

**

Throwing money at them is not a good idea. Unless they are willing to change their mindsets to “western” goals, they will not use the money in the way we want them to. I’m sure they would be happy to take it…but until the mindset changes, we would be funding the next generation of little terrorists.