Sweet bejeebus. Hey bud, if your facts are always “someone said” why do you go through all of the trouble. Why not just quote what pantom wrote and call them your “facts” and “evidence”? You keep swinging and missing. How many strikes before you would consider yourslef out?
You’re already out. You just don’t know it yet.
And <b>Patriot X</b>: no, you’re not the only one. It is lonely though, when all and sundry are debating the premise of democracy for the foreigners, a thing which concerns us as a people about as much as whether or not Chile gets to charge a higher or lower price for its copper tomorrow. I’m interested in that, but not because of what its relationship is to American foreign policy: I’m more concerned with what effect it will have on my investments. All those great pro-capitalist people out there apparently can’t be bothered, though; bringing democracy to the great unwashed, even when those unwashed, as in the case of Lebanon, already have it, seems to be far more important.
I think you may be a little over the top with your comparison to the falling of the Berlin freakin’ wall.
•The situation in Lebanon is interesting.
•The Moroccan demonstration stems from a unsettled war between Morocco and Algeria. There’ve been lots of demonstrations and attrocities on both sides of the dispute, and this latest round looks little different.
•Rights demonstrations by Kuwaiti women go back several years:
If you go looking for this stuff, you’ll find it. That doesn’t necessarily mean that it’s new, or astounding, or the fall of the freakin’ Berlin wall. It might just be normal noise that you’ve never bothered to notice before.
It’d be nice if you’re right, and I wish the Lebanese and Kuwaitis the best of luck and all, but I’ll have to see a little more concrete movement before signing on to the notion that a wall is tumbling down.
Hot damn, your full of hot air on this thread. Where is your substance at? You have yet to cite anything that supports your claim that the war was about oil. rjung has tried and failed miserably. And all you can do is some pathetic ad hominem drive-by? Or is it that you fully support rjung’s “cites” and I should put you in the same intellectual category as him?
As glorious and laudable as that is in principle, that’s precisely where at least one of the concerns lay. As PatriotX has pointed out, democracy in the Arab world has a tendency to bring Islamists to power. This has been proven true all over the Gulf, and is happening right before your eyes in Iraq. The consequences of a democracy in the hands of populace that is not politically learned enough to know how to a) protect it and b) not misuse it to suppress others are unknown at best, but certainly worthy of concern.
Many on the left have shouted it. Nothing seems to change such a pious mindset. And certainly the profiteering that’s occurring is as unalterable as the facts your expressed above.
But I have a question for you. If you’re so committed to getting the job in Iraq done right, why is your administration still only awarding contracts to coalition countries? You as a devout capitalist certainly would be against such pinko-commie notions of no-bid contracts and would welcome the efficiency that competition (namely from non-coalition countries) would provide, no? So how come your side isn’t championing that cause instead of asking the left to “do more?”
I’m not sure if you were asking for cites here or if you were asking more rhetorically in the context of your point. Are you asking for cites about the blatant nepotism?
There’s that phraseology again. It’s not going to hell in a handbasket, it’s going on an adventure in an eco-friendly cozy container. I can’t speak for everybody, but I don’t want a part of it.
I couldn’t agree more. Tell that to those on your side of the aisle who are putting stickers saying “revenge is sweet” and “fear this” (both found underneath a U.S. flag) on their bumpers. Or better yet, go after those in your party who feel homosexuals don’t deserve the same rights as heterosexuals.
Sure. Look up Bahrain in 1994 or Iran in 1999. I think a more recent one was Egypt in 2002. Trust me, they’ve been taking place for a long time. They just didn’t serve the purposes of Pax Americana until now and hence weren’t getting much traction in U.S. media.
Instead of flailing about with the cheap ad hominen attacks, why not demonstrate the superiority (cough) of your position and produce some evidence that the various corporate cronies and friends of the Administration haven’t been profiteering from this war?
In a clearing in the woods, nestled amongst old redwoods destined for toothpicks, we find a gathering of Pubbies, praising the miraculous advance of Freedom and Democracy, the blessings brought forth from the bold vision of The Leader. Gathered around the roaring fire (more redwoods, a few of the more tiresome Amendments…), neckties wrapped around their heads at jaunty and rakish angles. A few are demonstrating the random rythmic capacity of whitefolks on small drums which, despite appearances, are most definitely not bongoes. The smell of roasting spotted owl and whooping cranes wafts over the gathering, as song rises above them…
GeeDubya, my Lord! GeeDubya!
Oh, Lord! GeeDubya!..
Is this democracy on the march, or a reverse domino manuever?
That’s it, Squink. Look on the bright side. Maybe tyranny willl flourish after all. One can hope.
On the other hand, one thing dictatorships are good at is cranking out a good rally.
Squink, where are your happy thoughts?
It’s Syria, which controls Hesbollah, showing that it isn’t serious about letting Lebanon go its own way.
Ain’t enough rolleyes in the world for *that * crack.
Not to put too fine a point on it, but yes. We’re not leaving Iraq before the insurgency is under control, and Ted Kennedy suggesting that we do has exactly zero chance of changing our policy and a non-zero chance of emboldening the insurgency. Shut him up. Here’s something specific the left can do: The Trotskyite pro-terrorists at International ANSWER are planning protests on March 19 demanding that the US leave Iraq now (and their usual litany of other stuff). Everybody’s on board that whether we should have gone in the first place leaving now is bad, right? So tell your lefty friends NOT TO GO TO THE PROTEST! The protests have a zero chance of changing our policy and a non-zero chance of embolding the insurgents. It sure would be nice if not a single patriotic American got conned into giving those ANSWER guys legitimacy.
Yep, it is. I have faith in humanity and believe that on balance people with self-determination will generally make better, more peaceful decisions for themselves than dictators will make for them. But this isn’t going to be a 100% thing; I’m under no illusions about that. There’s a lot of tears to be shed between now and the future.
Thanks, but there are way too many reflexive anti-Americans on that side.
How 'bout a push or two?
Too small potatos to worry about, frankly. The big contracts will be let by the elected, sovereign Iraqi government in the future. They can choose to include countries who opposed their liberation and collaborated with Saddam in the oil-for-food program or not as they see fit.
Your call. Stand out of the way, please, we’ve got work to do.
Redwood is for decks and hottubs. Duh.
'luci, did you sneak into Bohemian Grove, you naughty boy?
Could be a long damn time, then - perhaps even up to the next election? Don’t fool yourself that the way things are now is the way things will always be. The insurgency, as measured by US troop deaths as well as Iraqi deaths, is getting stronger now - what demonstrable trend do you extrapolate toward a date at which it will be over?
Nice rhetorical flourish in the next sentence there, invoking Ted Kennedy and Trotskyites by way of attempting to discredit the entire pro-peace position - I’m sure you found yourself reassuring by doing that, but were you really trying to convince anyone else? You can do better than that, much better, but it’s a pity you rarely try.
[quote= I have faith in humanity and believe that on balance people with self-determination will generally make better, more peaceful decisions for themselves than dictators will make for them.[/quote]
About damn time the Republicans got to think that way, after Reagan’s devastation of Central America and even Bush’s attempts to force a democratically-elected president out in Venezuela. The test will be if he’s really willing to accept a Shiite theocracy in charge of Iraq’s oil - how confident are you of that? Seriously?
Bush, Europe etc. are doing a nice job of that already in Lebanon. Still, there’s the question of what the Lebanese people actually want:
See that’s interesting because when
instructs the US to fuck off in no uncertain terms as they certainly will, then the insurgents will have won.
conned is what a being a patriotic American is all about.
Oh, now I have to prove a negative eh? rjung, for someone with as much experience here at SDMB, you astound me with your lack of debating skills.
Really? Finally, someone with some real expertise ('cause I don’t know squat, Lebanese politics confuses me, so I’m glad you’re on board here…)
I mean, I had heard so much about how Iran controls Hezbollah, but it’s actually Syria. Well, that settles that! How *much * do they control it, by the way? If Syria says “Give Ariel Sharon a slobbering knob-job in downtown Tel Aviv at high noon!”, they’ll do it? And what happens if Iran says yes, and Syria says no? Are their interests invariably identical? Well, that would certainly simplify things!
That must be why GeeDubya is doing such a splendid job there in the ME, things are so straightforward and uncomplicated! And here I was thinking there was really a lot to all of this, but there isn’t! And while we’re at it, who are all these marinated Christians I keep hearing about?