None that I particularly feel like debating with you.
So I’ll repeatedly allude to them and then cut and run when called on it.
They are, however, absolutely devastating arguments against the use of apocalyptic rhetoric asserting that this war is about [ OMINOUS ECHO ] The Survival Of Western Civilization [ /OMINOUS ECHO ], or even the silent acceptance of such rhetoric by the leadership of one’s faction.
RTFirefly has made that point clearly enough, and repeatedly enough, that continued failure to address it has crossed the line from mere carelessness to outright intellecutual dishonesty.
My experience jibes with woodstockbirdybird’s.
In other words, you have no such “great arguments”. A dishonest tactic.
Then why did you bring it up? Is this the forum appropriate to make assertions you are unwilling to substantiate?
No, you don’t understand. I’m not going to debate them here because, where the Iraq war is concerned it is not possible to have reasonable debates. That’s why I stopped debating the war here months ago. And frankly, I could give a rat’s ass if you like it or not. Your opinion means absolutely nothing to me.
It related directly to the OP.
I just asked a question, you’re the one who made the assertion. But yes, this is the forum to make assertions you are unwilling to substantiate. More thoughts on that here.
Wow! I actually agree with you for once. I sometimes print your posts to wipe my ass with.
Meanwhile keep battling “them terraists” from the comfort of your living room. How many did you kill today?
Chickenshit.
I see. You question relates directly to the OP, my answer to that question does not. I should have gotten a ruling in advance as to pertinance and propriety. As an acknowledged authority on Board propriety, perhaps you could clarify.
BTW, Hentor, well fucking said.
A “me too” post? You betcha. All you wimpy chickenhawks make me ill.
Yeah, let them die or get their limbs blown off while you cheer the carnage from your Lazy-Boys.
Barf.
I hope I do not presume too much upon our comradely regard, but you’re wrong. Not all men are given to combat, even fewer are skilled, fewer still can conduct themselves nobly. Personally, I haven’t the slightest idea if I would acquit myself bravely, or shit my pants and cry.
Besides, and perhaps more to the point, to belabor and insult a Canadian for not rushing to join our military brushes against absurdity. As well, it might be best to hold such awe-inspiring ferocity in reserve.
I do like it, since it amounts to an admission that I’m right and you are a liar and a coward. If you didn’t intend to debate, you shouldn’t have simply asserted there are good arguments for the war; a blatantly stupid statement at this point. And if you make such an assertion, it’s cowardly to refuse to even say what they are.
I never said it didn’t. I just said I didn’t want to debate that subject here. I’ll be glad to do so in a GD thread.
Have you ever considered a career as a matador? If you can evade one point so skillfully, two shouldn’t represent much of a challenge.
The spittle-flecked responses coming from the usual subjects here are precisely why I don’t bother trying to debate this war on this message board. I’m perfectly willing to concede that there are valid arguments against the war. However, the people on the other side are absolutely unwilling to concede any reasonable arguments on the other side, and attempts to discuss them always devolves into the same tiresome sound bites, ‘chickenhawk’ accusations, and rants.
Thanks. Now attach an argument to it. You’re asserting some sort of equivalence here, but all I’m seeing is the assertion.
Physician, heal thyself. You’re the guy who won’t even defend his positions in GD. I’m happy to do it there, which is the place where it should be done. And I’ve given my reasons. If that’s enough for you, well, that’s just too bad.
This is bullshit. It’s no sort of admission, except maybe that he’s tired of talking to you.
That said, Sam, though valid arguments can be made against just picking up and leaving Iraq now that we’ve broken it, as far as I can tell the arguments for the invasion occurring have been spectacularly shown to also be bullshit. I cannot think of one single reason the American people were given for the invasion that turned out to be true.
I don’t consider it central to what I’m saying. But I confess a combination of great amusement at what supposedly responsible parties will put in a “fact sheet” these days, and a continued amazement at the Orwellian willingness of those people to twist the language.
I certainly wouldn’t put it in a list of facts, but would consider it a rebuttable presumption backed by a track record of 3.75 years’ duration. IOW, it would have to be a damned strong rebuttal, explaining how this attempt to win Iraq was different from all the others, especially given that the same idiots are in charge.
True dat. I’d disagree with whether partition would make that more or less likely, but that’s a side issue for another day. The reality, as you suggest, is that an Iraq that lacks real government over all its territory (be it one government or several) has potential as a terrorist base.
I guess the question is, in what sense are they there now?
Most accounts suggest that there is a flow of jihadis into Iraq desiring to make war on the Western infidel crusader, but one would think that would dry up once we left; young men from Egypt or wherever are less likely to be interested in traveling to Iraq to blow up Shi’ites.
I’d be more worried about the actual al-Qaeda, as opposed to the seemingly bogus one operating in Iraq, moving into Iraq after we leave. But they seem to have safe harbor in Waziristan, so I’m not all that worried about it, though I expect our intel people will be keeping an eye on it. And someday we may even have an Administration that uses intel in honest ways.