ruled paper
|
|
Registered:10/18/2002
Time spent: 0 hours
|
(Date Posted:03/31/2003 3:05 PM)
Reply to : jonnyblaze
In a WWII type situation, I would say, most definitely, but this isn't exactly WWII we're talking about. What does everyone else think?
Yeah, this definatly isn't WWII. I'm afraid it's getting more like Viet Nam every day. Strateically the best thing would be to bomb the hell out of Baghdad but then we woluld be killing 5-6 million people.
usertype:5 tt= 0
--------------------------------------------------------------
"If they give you ruled paper, write the other way" -- Juan Jiminez
I speak for the trees
"God does not have a penis" -- Dr. Begres
|
Dumpster
|
|
Registered:11/07/2001
Time spent: 0 hours
|
(Date Posted:03/31/2003 3:48 PM)
Hi, Jonnyblaze, and welcome to the Foyer.
It looks to me like the Army and Marines are pushing right into Baghdad. I doubt there will be much of a siege, or really even much urban combat, once the Republican Guards are destroyed, but I could be wrong. IMHO, the American people are prepared for more carnage than during the last Gulf War, but we have been led to believe in surgical strikes and antiseptic warfare in which few people actually die. So I don't know how far the public is willing to go with this thing. As I've made clear in other threads, I support this war, but I recognize that war is a terrible thing.
usertype:5 tt= 0
--------------------------------------------------------------
My blog
|
Faraday
|
|
From: United Kingdom 
Registered:09/09/2002
Time spent: 0 hours
|
(Date Posted:03/31/2003 4:52 PM)
Reply to : jonnyblaze
I think it is safe to say, at this point, that regardless of what side of the war divide you stand on, the campaign of "shock & awe" has not been successful.
Be careful what you say. Pulitzer prize winner Peter Arnet just got fired from NBC for saying the same thing. As for the question, I think most people will support a seige. The only people solidly against it (apart from most of the world) seem to be the people in Iraq and Afghanistan. (The BBC Radio4 "Today" program - the one the politicians listen to in Britain - has a daily review of the world's papers. Each day it comes from a different country. Yesterday a correspondent in Kabul reviewed the newspapers there, and without exception they opposed the war.) Clearly the Iraqis and Afghans do not know what is good for them.
usertype:5 tt= 0
--------------------------------------------------------------
[LINK SiteName=shameless plug for my new project Target=_blank]http://enterthestory.com[/LINK]
|
Letting Go
|
|
Registered:02/18/2003
Time spent: 0 hours
|
(Date Posted:03/31/2003 5:30 PM)
There will be no long term seige on Baghdad. This is not Vietnam. We are wiping out the Iraqi army, paramilitary etc. In fact, Saddam is probably dead. (I believe we killed him the first night.) What saddam and his followers have done to the Iraqi people and continue to do to them is awful. This information will continue to come out.
We will take Baghdad in less than three weeks from now and the war will be delared over in less than three months from now.
There is no bunker we cannot get to in Baghdad.
Listen to this Iraqi lady explain what the war is about:
http://media.radcity.net/KILT/iraq/iraqiwoman.ram
usertype:5 tt= 0
--------------------------------------------------------------
In fact once you understand the principles you are only truly happy when you live them.
|
Wishy Washy
|
|
Registered:05/26/2002
Time spent: 0 hours
|
(Date Posted:03/31/2003 5:39 PM)
Reply to : Letting Go
There will be no long term seige on Baghdad. This is not Vietnam. We are wiping out the Iraqi army, paramilitary etc. In fact, Saddam is probably dead. (I believe we killed him the first night.) What saddam and his followers have done to the Iraqi people and continue to do to them is awful. This information will continue to come out.We will take Baghdad in less than three weeks from now and the war will be delared over in less than three months from now.There is no bunker we cannot get to in Baghdad.Listen to this Iraqi lady explain what the war is about:http://media.radcity.net/KILT/iraq/iraqiwoman.ram
Shew, that clip made me BAWL.
Anyway I respectfully disagree, I think we are in for a long fight, SH is alive, and that there are bunkers we aren't going to be able to penetrate. There was a German architect that a journalist interviewd. He talked about a bumker thathe had built that he believes is definately able to withstand any bomb, nuclear or otherwise. He says that that journalist is the only person that has talked to him about it. He still has the plans he says and is suprised our government hasn't talked to him. Those are just my thoughts though. Thanks for the clip.
usertype:5 tt= 0
|
Letting Go
|
|
Registered:02/18/2003
Time spent: 0 hours
|
(Date Posted:03/31/2003 6:04 PM)
WW,
I respect your opinion. And I hope you are wrong. I believe SH is dead.
Do not believe everything you hear. (even from me  )The German designer does not know the capability of our weapons. There is a lot more to deep earth penetrators then has ever been mentioned in the press. These penetrators are very scary. As I said before there is no bunker that we cannot get to...300, 600, 1000, or 1500+ feet of solid concrete it makes no difference.
BTW, there is another bunker technique called isolation. It is where you callapse the pathways into and out of the bunkers. This leaves the occupants trapped. War is bad all the way around. But, if you are going to get into one win it and win it convincingly.
usertype:5 tt= 0
--------------------------------------------------------------
In fact once you understand the principles you are only truly happy when you live them.
|
Wishy Washy
|
|
Registered:05/26/2002
Time spent: 0 hours
|
(Date Posted:03/31/2003 6:16 PM)
Reply to : Letting Go
WW,I respect your opinion. And I hope you are wrong. I believe SH is dead.Do not believe everything you hear. (even from me)The German designer does not know the capability of our weapons. There is a lot more to deep earth penetrators then has ever been mentioned in the press. These penetrators are very scary. As I said before there is no bunker that we cannot get to...300, 600, 1000, or 1500+ feet of solid concrete it makes no difference.BTW, there is another bunker technique called isolation. It is where you callapse the pathways into and out of the bunkers. This leaves the occupants trapped. War is bad all the way around. But, if you are going to get into one win it and win it convincingly.
And I hope you ARE right I have said before I don't have all the facts, I know nothing about weapons, government, politics, or anything else that could help me make an educated guess. Just my gut feeling.
usertype:5 tt= 0
|
gracie
|
|
Registered:07/09/2001
Time spent: 0 hours
|
(Date Posted:03/31/2003 7:33 PM)
Reply to : Faraday
Pulitzer prize winner Peter Arnet just got fired from NBCfor saying the same thing.
Nah, I think he got fired for giving an interview to Iraqi TV, in which he made clear that he was a sympathizer for the enemy. He's made quite a few of those sorts of comments, and NBC cannot afford to have him on their payroll. There's a lot of money in the news these days.
usertype:5 tt= 0
|
Archimedes 
|
|
Rank:none
Score:2363
Posts:2363
Registered:01/20/2002
Time spent: 0 hours
|
(Date Posted:03/31/2003 8:50 PM)
There will be no "seige" of Baghdad. Geez, this thing has only been going on for two weeks. Even with the U.S. military's amazing capabilities, it still takes a little while to move 200,000 men and all the support equipment and materiel into place. The military's philosophy is "refit, resupply and reinforce forward," and we're seing an example of that philosophy being implemented. We moved a small, highly mobile force into place to secure strategic points needed for the re-supply (mainly airfields) and now that we have them, there are massive shipments of men and materials moving forward. My guess is the main assault on Baghdad will begin within a couple of days. No, it won't be easy. Yes, people will die. No, it isn't the United States' fault, it's Saddham Hussein's fault, be he alive or dead.
So, patience. You'll see the shots of Abrams M1A1's in the Baghdad town square soon enough. Too bad Geraldo Rivera won't be there!!!
Hope that wasn't too much flag-waving.
usertype:1 tt= 0
--------------------------------------------------------------
I am she.
|
NaturalMan
|
|
Rank:none
Score:1914
Posts:1914
Registered:01/14/2003
Time spent: 0 hours
|
(Date Posted:03/31/2003 9:44 PM)
Reply to : gracie
Reply to : FaradayPulitzer prize winner Peter Arnet just got fired from NBCfor saying the same thing.Nah, I think he got fired for giving an interview to Iraqi TV, in which he made clear that he was a sympathizer for the enemy. He's made quite a few of those sorts of comments, and NBC cannot afford to have him on their payroll. There's a lot of money in the news these days.
You are right! He was fired because he is an opportunistic a*%hole taking advantage of his position to further his own selfish needs and desires. Peter Arnett, in my view was attempting to engraciate himself to Iraqi authorities to gain greater access and was will to do WHATEVER to get it.
As a news journalist he breached the standard of offering up his, I would say very uninformed opinion at best, and total propaganda at worst to Iraqi TV, which in fact, was helping the enemy bolstering their moral and providing them with more propaganda.
Peter Arnett, to me is the kind of person that would probably have cozied up to Hitler and done his biding if he thought it would get himself ahead.
He is entitled to his opinions for sure. THAT is NOT what this is about. It IS about aided and abetting the enemy. It is about naked ambition and doing whatever to get what you want. It is about ethical standards violated.
In his apology all he said was that he was sorry expressing what in his opinion is common knowledge had caused such an uproar and was so poorly received in America. He said he was stupid for doing such a thing. No where did he truly aknowledge that what he did was inherently wrong. The is a moral and ethical failure of an indivdual in a position of influence.
He is a slimeball, opportunistic, snake that I would never turn my back on. If I were in a foxhole with this chump I'd probably make sure he was uhh... hit by friendly fire. Then I would know that at least I had some chance of survival.
This kind of ire and vitriolic response is somewhat uncharacteristic of me. I do not like to write or speak this negatively, but this dude has proven his depravity more than once. He is just one big loser that I wish would just disappear.
usertype:3 tt= 0
--------------------------------------------------------------
"Is this a something? Or... is this a nothing?
Barbara Hendrickson - BIG LOVE
|
Archimedes
|
|
Rank:none
Score:2363
Posts:2363
Registered:01/20/2002
Time spent: 0 hours
|
(Date Posted:03/31/2003 9:56 PM)
I agree with the sentiment regarding Peter Arnett. I do think his greatest sin, however, is that of insufferable arrogance. Did I hear he is still over there, though, reporting for some British tabloid?
usertype:1 tt= 0
--------------------------------------------------------------
I am she.
|
gracie
|
|
Registered:07/09/2001
Time spent: 0 hours
|
(Date Posted:03/31/2003 9:58 PM)
Reply to : NonBICBoy
Whoa there, boy! I didn't realize that would bring out such harsh feelings. I really don't know much about the man, other than I haven't seen or heard much from him since Gulf War I. My impression was that he really DOES sympathize with the current regime in Iraq, not that he was being opportunistic.
usertype:5 tt= 0
|
Archimedes
|
|
Rank:none
Score:2363
Posts:2363
Registered:01/20/2002
Time spent: 0 hours
|
(Date Posted:03/31/2003 10:20 PM)
Reply to : gracie
Yea, he is a sympathizer. He got fired by CNN during the Gulf War for making particularly scurrilous reports. You know it had to be over-the-top if CNN canned him!
BTW, have I been banned from this forum yet?
usertype:1 tt= 0
--------------------------------------------------------------
I am she.
|
Dumpster
|
|
Registered:11/07/2001
Time spent: 0 hours
|
(Date Posted:03/31/2003 10:41 PM)
Arnett was trashcanned by CNN after he narrated a story claiming that U.S. Special Forces used poison gas in Laos during the Vietnam War. The story was convincingly disproved and Arnett became a media laughingstock. Yet up he pops in Baghdad. Go figure. Probably NBC WANTED him to exploit his friendly ties with Saddam's regime to get some news, but he made an ass of himself and had to be dumped. And then there's Geraldo . . .
usertype:5 tt= 0
--------------------------------------------------------------
My blog
|
NaturalMan
|
|
Rank:none
Score:1914
Posts:1914
Registered:01/14/2003
Time spent: 0 hours
|
(Date Posted:03/31/2003 11:02 PM)
Reply to : gracie
Reply to : NonBICBoyWhoa there, boy! I didn't realize that would bring out such harsh feelings. I really don't know much about the man, other than I haven't seen or heard much from him since Gulf War I. My impression was that he really DOES sympathize with the current regime in Iraq, not that he was being opportunistic.
To me Peter Arnett's Pulitzer Prize has about as much validity as an Olympic sprinter on steroids with a Gold medal who didn't get caught.
Arnett blurs the ethical landscape to meet his own self-centered ambitions. For him it is not about providing the world with images and "the story" that will enlighten and illuminate us. It is about his own personal glory.
I probably have a sensitive spot over this kind of behavior. As I have mentioned I am currently unemployed because I refused to engage is unethical behavior that I could have most likely gotten away with and was threatened and intimidated to engage in. I refused and here I am. Arnett engaged in the journalistic equivalent of this kind of corporate behavior. Geraldo too. When I say what Geraldo was doing on TV the other night I could NOT believe my eyes. I felt VERY uneasy about what I was seeing. I could not believe that what he was sharing had been approved by his military liaison. Sure enough, next day he's gone. These bozo's have no moral fiber. They are hollow inside. Their mantra is "do whatever it takes that you think you can get away with". Unfortunately for them, there is an occasional miscalculation, a random event or some brave soul that exposes these kinds of bastards.
There is a public trust at stake and these types do NOT respect it!! They feel that they are above it.
This is the thing that hurts the most about the LDS church. Not that JS was some kind of charlatan. Big deal! There have been others and will continue to be more. What pisses me off is that we have a LONG history of GAs who I KNOW know better, but out of self preservation, retention of power and prestige, who knows what all, refuse to create a "transparency" in church procedures, history and the like, that should prevail and would prevail if Christlike principles were the guidelines.
I will go away a regain my composure. I just can't stand those who take advantage of others who are innocent or trusting for their own gain. It is ruthless and disgusting!!
usertype:3 tt= 0
--------------------------------------------------------------
"Is this a something? Or... is this a nothing?
Barbara Hendrickson - BIG LOVE
|
gracie
|
|
Registered:07/09/2001
Time spent: 0 hours
|
(Date Posted:04/01/2003 12:00 AM)
Reply to : NonBICBoy
Well, it's interesting hearing all this. I have cut down on my news watching lately. I just can't take it. But I enjoy reading what you guys think, even if one of you is a shameless flag waver!
I heard about some incident with Geraldo, but I cannot gather what the gist of it is. What happened?
Or you could just help me find a link that would explain it.
usertype:5 tt= 0
|
NaturalMan
|
|
Rank:none
Score:1914
Posts:1914
Registered:01/14/2003
Time spent: 0 hours
|
(Date Posted:04/01/2003 12:30 AM)
Reply to : gracie
Reply to : NonBICBoyWell, it's interesting hearing all this. I have cut down on my news watching lately. I just can't take it. But I enjoy reading what you guys think, even if one of you is a shameless flag waver!I heard about some incident with Geraldo, but I cannot gather what the gist of it is. What happened?Or you could just help me find a link that would explain it.
My perspective, clearly subject to rebuttals is as follows:
Geraldo started drawing in the dirt with a camera focused on his dirt drawings, in which the exact positions of specific U.S. military units were being diagramed by him, all while he gave a fairly detailed narrative to go along with the dirt drawings. Clearly putting brave, courageous U.S. troops and troop movements at risk by his careless indescretions to "scoop" a more fascinating story. He was informed by the Army that he had clearly violated the rules set forth for embedded reporters and was promptly shipped out.
Geraldo is just an immature clown that gets too aggressive with his reporting and loses his good judgement. All of this is perhaps foregivable when the story is about some Hollywood star or some other trivial matter, but this is WAR and there are REAL lives at stake.
As I have observed Geraldo on TV, he seemed to me, like a little kid who thought he was in a really cool game of cops and robbers, cowboys and indians or some army game with little plastic people. It is really too bad because on some level I like Geraldo and some aspects of his bravado, but not at the expense of others besides himself.
usertype:3 tt= 0
--------------------------------------------------------------
"Is this a something? Or... is this a nothing?
Barbara Hendrickson - BIG LOVE
|
NaturalMan
|
|
Rank:none
Score:1914
Posts:1914
Registered:01/14/2003
Time spent: 0 hours
|
(Date Posted:04/01/2003 1:09 AM)
Reply to : NonBICBoy
My perspective, clearly subject to rebuttals is as follows:
Well here is my journalistic retraction of my previously published story. Apparently I have been victimized by MSNBC and their aggressive reporting stating that Geraldo had been removed from his imbedded position. I just read something else that says this report was false and that Geraldo was still in Iraq reporting away, even though, the article reads, some of his tone is a bit "cheesy".
I want to apologize to this BB for my misjudgement in reporting what we all know, or knew to be true. I know it may have caused some anger and resentment and for that I am sorry..... Just call me Peter 
usertype:3 tt= 0
--------------------------------------------------------------
"Is this a something? Or... is this a nothing?
Barbara Hendrickson - BIG LOVE
|
beijing
|
|
Registered:05/24/2002
Time spent: 0 hours
|
(Date Posted:04/01/2003 2:36 AM)
Reply to : Dumpster
IMHO, the American people are prepared for more carnage than during the last Gulf War, but we have been led to believe in surgical strikes and antiseptic warfare in which few people actually die. So I don't know how far the public is willing to go with this thing.
Here's my take. This has been the crux of my personal opposition to the war all along. Our men and women in uniform are overseas, far from their families, fighting, and some of them dying. Why? Because they have been told that this is a necessary part of the War on Terrorism. They have been told that their service and sacrifice will prevent attacks such as 9/11. I salute them for their willingness to protect this country, for their desire to prevent terror attacks on our people. But I believe their mission there will not have the desired effect of preventing terror attacks. Quite the opposite. I think their mission will bring about exactly what it's supposed to prevent.
Someone here recommended that the U.S. military treat Iraq the way General Sherman treated Atlanta, as well as my fair city, among many others. While the scorched earth policy was effective militarily, it led Southerners to hate and distrust Northerners. Not to mention the years of humiliating occupation euphemistically called "Reconstruction," which was a breeding ground for further resentment. It took many years for that rift to heal, and even now you can still see the scars. That's why there are people here still to this day 100 years later, who wave the stars and bars and spout off about d*mn Yankees and refer to the War of Northern Aggression. They're keeping the memory of those war wounds alive. For obvious reasons, I think the rift between the U.S. and Iraq is going to be much harder to heal than the rift between North and South.
Personally, I'm even more concerned now than in the previous (pre-9/11) war, that we minimize "collateral damage" in Iraq. Because now we never know which Iraqi civilian casualty will have a family member or friend who is changed by the experience of a loved one being killed by the Americans, and turn into the next Mohammed Atta.
usertype:5 tt= 0
--------------------------------------------------------------
Such was the power of the handbag of glory that ladies wept when they saw it, and all those who touched it went straight to heaven.
|
gracie
|
|
Registered:07/09/2001
Time spent: 0 hours
|
(Date Posted:04/01/2003 4:34 AM)
Reply to : beijing
But I believe their mission there will not have the desired effect of preventing terror attacks. Quite the opposite. I think their mission will bring about exactly what it's supposed to prevent.
I hope you are wrong. In my opinion, it was the spinelessness of both the Bush 41 and Clinton administrations that brought on more terrorism. The Arab mind respects strength. They want to see if we have the balls to carry this out. I believe that the vast majority of the Arab world would be pleased as punch to see Saddam dead and someone less volatile in control of Iraq, but they have every reason to believe that we will leave the job half done. If we stick to it and make a regime change and get out within a reasonable amount of time, we will earn their respect.
The Bush 41 administration left the Iraqis high and dry after that war. They have not forgotten. That's one reason they're fighting us so hard now. But it is my hope that in a few weeks they will feel safe enough to trust the Americans and get life back to normal ASAP. This is what the plan is, and I intend to lend them my support. I think that the former method of half-ass measures to fight terrorism only brought on more.
usertype:5 tt= 0
|
NaturalMan
|
|
Rank:none
Score:1914
Posts:1914
Registered:01/14/2003
Time spent: 0 hours
|
(Date Posted:04/01/2003 5:20 AM)
Reply to : gracie
The Arab mind respects strength.
They want to see if we have the balls to carry this out.
I think that the former method of half-ass measures to fight terrorism only brought on more.
WOW!!! Some very strong statements from such a delicate looking woman (see avatar)!!!
Unfortunately I believe you are exactly right.
Bullies, whether they are found on the block corner, school ground, community park or in a nation like Iraq, more often than not, only understand one language and that is a good ass kicking and proof that you will take it to the wall to take them out of the picture for good.
Most bullies are spineless cowards at the core and NEVER stand alone. They only hold their ground when they have "backup" by a bunch of butt lickers surrounding them.
Fear is what keeps these types of slimeballs at bay until a new generation can be educated by the blessings of a democratic society.
I believe that is the only chance. I agree, if we would have stood our ground sooner, they may have been less success in terrorist recruiting.
I honestly do not want to be critical of an entire group of people but the more I see the more I believe that there is a serious psychosis that exists, is spawned and flourishes within the world of Islam. It has all the earmarks of creating an environment in which cultish behaviors occurs in numerous group settings. It is disgusting and appalling how susceptible some muslims are to this stuff. It is beyond bizarre! Did anyone hear the speech given today by Saddam's information minister? Just listen to it to understand what I'm talking about.
usertype:3 tt= 0
--------------------------------------------------------------
"Is this a something? Or... is this a nothing?
Barbara Hendrickson - BIG LOVE
|
Obfuscator
|
|
Registered:01/10/2003
Time spent: 0 hours
|
(Date Posted:04/01/2003 6:48 AM)
Reply to : NonBICBoy
I honestly do not want to be critical of an entire group of people but the more I see the more I believe that there is a serious psychosis that exists, is spawned and flourishes within the world of Islam. It has all the earmarks of creating an environment in which cultish behaviors occurs in numerous group settings. It is disgusting and appalling how susceptible some muslims are to this stuff. It is beyond bizarre! Did anyone hear the speech given today by Saddam's information minister? Just listen to it to understand what I'm talking about.
Here is an interesting article relating to this subject: http://www.nypost.com/seven/03302003/postopinion/opedcolumnists/72148.htm
Some may call this anti-Arab, but the point is basically that there is an Arab inferiority complex due to the fact that there is really nothing in their current society for them to be proud of or hope for in the future (regardless of whose fault that is.)
I think the thing that bothers me most about anti-Americanism (or just anti-Westernism) is that it is in America's best interests for everyone in the world to be prosperous, free, and happy. I think this is understood and is the main motivaton and goal for American policy (although you may sometimes disagree with the methods and often with the results.) When criticism comes our way, it feels like those goals are being criticized. I guess we need to understand that you can't force prosperity on people. If it turns out that Bush is in the wrong for starting this war, it will not be because he wants to seize oil or kill Muslims. It will be because of an overly simplistic belief that a democratic Iraq will magically appear and solve all of the region's problems. Personally, I like to think that such hopes are not unrealistic, but we'll see.
usertype:5 tt= 0
|
Faraday
|
|
From: United Kingdom
Registered:09/09/2002
Time spent: 0 hours
|
(Date Posted:04/01/2003 10:48 AM)
Reply to : Obfuscator
Reply to : NonBICBoyI honestly do not want to be critical of an entire group of people but the more I see the more I believe that there is a serious psychosis that exists, is spawned and flourishes within the world of Islam. ...
it is in America's best interests for everyone in the world to be prosperous, free, and happy. I think this is understood and is the main motivaton and goal for American policy
LOL! Can anyone else see the irony in this, coming on an apostate LDS forum? it is not appropriate to discuss anything that might be seriously wrong with our own society (see the thread on body counts) but simply stating that we are superior and our motives are pure, leading to pure actions - that is perfectly acceptable. It reminds me of being at church. Still, church serves a useful purpose in making people feel better about a complex world, and nobody ever claimed that the forum was anything other than a place of escape, so I suppose I am being a party-pooper.
P.S. Before someone accuses me of self-hatred, being pro-Islam or whatever, please let me make a plea on behalf of democracy. All the major theories of democracy (such as the Socrates' pure democracy, Schumpeter's transformative view or his alternative elites view, deliberative democracy or public choice theory) require that unpopular, even cynical views are essential to progress. And I would draw your attention to the banner that runs along the top of this forum: "The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it." If you have an alternative theory whereby society can progress through blind patriotism, please let us hear it. Otherwise, any claim to democracy that does not have a sound theoretical base is just flag-waving and solves nothing. If you believe in democracy, please join me - and the American founding fathers - in glorious, life-afirming cynicism. Blind patiotism is not good in either religion or politics.
usertype:5 tt= 0
--------------------------------------------------------------
[LINK SiteName=shameless plug for my new project Target=_blank]http://enterthestory.com[/LINK]
|
gracie
|
|
Registered:07/09/2001
Time spent: 0 hours
|
(Date Posted:04/01/2003 3:34 PM)
Reply to : Faraday
Faraday, I read your response before reading all of NBB's and Obfuscator's, and at first, I was right there with ya. I think Obfuscator's whole post says what I was thinking, that if the Bush policy proves to be wrong, it will be because he oversimplified the situation. I think that entirely possible. The middle east has never been simply defined.
It's true that the Arab/Muslim world has a huge inferiority complex, and this explains in part why you see exiled Iraqis all over the world headed back to Baghdad to defend their homeland. It reminds me a bit of General Lee, choosing to defend Virginia instead of staying loyal to the Union. I personally would not make that choice, because I don't hold to the belief that my family and my country are more right than anyone else.
In this case, however, I think Pres. Bush is probably guilty of naivete. But I hope I'm wrong.
usertype:5 tt= 0
|
NaturalMan
|
|
Rank:none
Score:1914
Posts:1914
Registered:01/14/2003
Time spent: 0 hours
|
(Date Posted:04/01/2003 4:09 PM)
Reply to : NonBICBoy
I honestly do not want to be critical of an entire group of people but the more I see the more I believe that there is a serious psychosis that exists, is spawned and flourishes within the world of Islam. It has all the earmarks of creating an environment in which cultish behaviors occurs in numerous group settings. It is disgusting and appalling how susceptible some muslims are to this stuff. It is beyond bizarre! Did anyone hear the speech given today by Saddam's information minister? Just listen to it to understand what I'm talking about.
I suppose I will reply to my own post here and point out a similar situation I see in the midst of Mormon culture.
The is a whole set of LDS beliefs and teachings that when they all come together and are mixed with a little bit of psychosis in a tragic spirirtual soup you end up with:
The Elizabeth Smart saga.
Prophets in Parowan.
A people that are consistently victimized by business scams.
Whole communities where it is acceptable to arrange marriages of teenage girls.
I could go on but will stop other than to say that belief systems that make their adherents susceptible to these kinds of things SHOULD be questioned.
This is not a condemnation of a society entirely just the serious questioning of an underlying belief system that make one susceptible to occasionally tragic consequences.
usertype:3 tt= 0
--------------------------------------------------------------
"Is this a something? Or... is this a nothing?
Barbara Hendrickson - BIG LOVE
|
Faraday
|
|
From: United Kingdom
Registered:09/09/2002
Time spent: 0 hours
|
(Date Posted:04/01/2003 4:32 PM)
Reply to : NonBICBoy
I could go on but will stop other than to say that belief systems that make their adherents susceptible to these kinds of things SHOULD be questioned.
I entirely agree. And there are plenty of people questioning these societies. But it is where questioning stops that I become suspicious.
usertype:5 tt= 0
--------------------------------------------------------------
[LINK SiteName=shameless plug for my new project Target=_blank]http://enterthestory.com[/LINK]
|
Archimedes
|
|
Rank:none
Score:2363
Posts:2363
Registered:01/20/2002
Time spent: 0 hours
|
(Date Posted:04/01/2003 6:24 PM)
Reply to : gracie
...this explains in part why you see exiled Iraqis all over the world headed back to Baghdad to defend their homeland.
Ahem. I don't believe there is any hard evidence that this is actually happening, in any substantial numbers. Whoever is in power in Baghdad at the moment certainly hopes it is true, and I suspect that is where the rumor originated. The liberal media is only too happy to oblige by picking up the rumor and reporting it as established fact.
Besides, even if some Iraqis have returned to Baghdad, it does not mean they have done so to "defend" Saddam's regime. They may see a real opportunity coming up to get back home and rebuild their lives. They may see an opportunity to check in on family and friends.
usertype:1 tt= 0
--------------------------------------------------------------
I am she.
|
gracie
|
|
Registered:07/09/2001
Time spent: 0 hours
|
(Date Posted:04/01/2003 6:27 PM)
Reply to : Archimedes
Ahem at you. I never said there were large numbers, just that they were returning from hither and yon. I saw them myself on TV.
I have also seen stories of Iraqi Americans joining the US military, putting their lives on the line to topple Saddam.
usertype:5 tt= 0
|
Dumpster
|
|
Registered:11/07/2001
Time spent: 0 hours
|
(Date Posted:04/01/2003 6:59 PM)
Reply to : beijing
Someone here recommended that the U.S. military treat Iraq the way General Sherman treated Atlanta, as well as my fair city, among many others. While the scorched earth policy was effective militarily, it led Southerners to hate and distrust Northerners. Not to mention the years of humiliating occupation euphemistically called "Reconstruction," which was a breeding ground for further resentment. It took many years for that rift to heal, and even now you can still see the scars. That's why there are people here still to this day 100 years later, who wave the stars and bars and spout off about d*mn Yankees and refer to the War of Northern Aggression. They're keeping the memory of those war wounds alive. For obvious reasons, I think the rift between the U.S. and Iraq is going to be much harder to heal than the rift between North and South.
To quote one of my favorite profs, "I too am a child of the suffering South." My reference to the march through Georgia was a bit of hyperbole, mostly to tweak the anonymous posters on that thread. Scorched Earth is not a good policy when winning the hearts and minds of the people appears to be a goal. I do think that Wolfowitz and the other neo-conservatives close to Rumsfeld underestimated the reaction in the Arab world to the Iraq invasion. It may temper the extreme form of their preemptive war theory, which would have us invading North Korea, Iran, Syria, etc., to effect changes in regimes in those countries too. IMHO, however, a sensitively executed post-war transition will do wonders to change minds in Iraq. The U.S. needs to be very careful not to allow this to be turned into a clash of civilizations.
usertype:5 tt= 0
--------------------------------------------------------------
My blog
|
jonnyblaze
|
|
Registered:02/02/2003
Time spent: 0 hours
|
(Date Posted:04/01/2003 7:03 PM)
Reply to gracie:
Bush oversimplifying the situation in Iraq (or the middle east for that matter)? Perish the thought! Just because the "Bush Doctrine" seems to be little more than, "if we drop enough bombs on Iraq, it will be the means of democratizing the entire region," that doesn't mean it's oversimplified!
And if you think it's oversimplified, you're unpatriotic, anti American, and probably a closet communist and Saddam and Osama lover, and you're probably gay too!
USA! USA!!!!!!!
usertype:5 tt= 0
--------------------------------------------------------------
Regards,
jb
|
|
|
