More Troops, Less Troops, or.... Both?

Cypress said:
Bush and Dixie have already driven the car over the edge of the cliff. The only option now is to either crash and burn, or try to bring it into a controlled crash-landing.

Therefore, a more apt analogy is that Bush cooked and served us what he promised to be a gourment meal. But it was a meal that turned out to be totally foul and unpalatable. And we're left deciding whether to order some crappy delivery pizza or chinese take-out.
Click to expand...
Nah, my analogy fits the best. The stew is simmering, nobody yet knows what might become of it. However, we have a whole new group of cooking students who just graduated who want to add their ingredients too... Not even that, but they cannot even decide on what the stew should really be, some want it to be Vegetarian, others Vegan, still others want to add more meat, some potatoes, one wants the previously mentioned Munchkin, and a few are so ticked that they weren't there when the cooking began that they want to add some turds.

Shoot, even the Dalai Lama is clear that nobody yet can foresee the actual outcome of this.
 
If you want to go w/ the stew analogy, you have to allot that the possiblity for a delicious tasting stew (western-style democracy with peace & stability for all) is really no longer a possiblity. If they new chefs added exactly the right ingredients & cooked it as perfectly as they could from the point that they took over, you MIGHT end up with something that is edible. It sure won't be tasty, though, or anything you would have hoped for if you initially ordered the stew with gusto.
 
Onceler said:
If you want to go w/ the stew analogy, you have to allot that the possiblity for a delicious tasting stew (western-style democracy with peace & stability for all) is really no longer a possiblity. If they new chefs added exactly the right ingredients & cooked it as perfectly as they could from the point that they took over, you MIGHT end up with something that is edible. It sure won't be tasty, though, or anything you would have hoped for if you initially ordered the stew with gusto.
Click to expand...
This one is good too...
 
The American voters voted you out, and now your opinions don't matter.

Well, of course, this is not true. If we lived in a dictatorship, perhaps you could argue that this is the case, but we don't. The American people had mid-term elections, which well over half of our government wasn't participating in, and while the win was significant, it didn't eliminate all other opinion.

Listen? You're damn straight we are listening! That is the point, no one is going to listen to people in power, bitch and moan about having no power! Get off the "Bush Bashing" bandwagon, and start proposing viable solutions to the problems in Iraq, or the next election might not be so kind to you.
 
"no one is going to listen to people in power, bitch and moan about having no power! Get off the "Bush Bashing" bandwagon"

Can you provide one quote from a prominent - or even fringe - Democrat since the election, where they are whining about not having power, or where they are bashing Bush on Iraq without presenting their own idea or thoughts on what we should do now?

Again....have you listened to ANYTHING out of Washington over the past few weeks, or are you basing all of your usual idiocy on the selective reading of a few anonymous internet message board posters?
 
Dixie said:
The American voters voted you out, and now your opinions don't matter.

Well, of course, this is not true. If we lived in a dictatorship, perhaps you could argue that this is the case, but we don't. The American people had mid-term elections, which well over half of our government wasn't participating in, and while the win was significant, it didn't eliminate all other opinion.

Listen? You're damn straight we are listening! That is the point, no one is going to listen to people in power, bitch and moan about having no power! Get off the "Bush Bashing" bandwagon, and start proposing viable solutions to the problems in Iraq, or the next election might not be so kind to you.
Click to expand...


"Get off the "Bush Bashing" bandwagon, and start proposing viable solutions to the problems in Iraq, or the next election might not be so kind to you."

Solutions have been proposed. You've pretended like you haven't read or heard them.

As for bush-bashing: Deal with it. He's one of the worst presidents in history, and he will be hung around your neck like an albatross. You and your fellow dittoheads worshipped him unquestioningly for at least his first five years, and gave him approval ratings among republican voters that not even ronald reagan enjoyed. You gave him a rubber stamp congress that did virtually everything he wanted. You're tied by the ankle to bush now, and you'll have to reap the consequences for blindly worshipping and electing an unqualified man to the most powerful office on the planet.

At least democrats were smart: they abandoned LBJ and Jimmy Carter in droves, before those two gentlemen could destroy the Democratic party with a second elected term.
 
You can choose to take a path to "investigating the president" and ultimately to impeachment, if that is what you think is the "right thing to do" for America. As experience would have it, it's best you know for certain, what America thinks about it, first.

It is comedy incarnate that the Repugnants would hound Clinton through an impeachment for nothing more than getting a BJ, yet when Bush hands the US its biggest foreign policy fuckup since Vietnam, it's all..."it's not good for America for him to be investigated."

Fuck that. He has handed AQ the biggest victory they have ever had, anyone with a grip on reality recognises that bringing democracy to Iraq is an ideal that in the context of our current battle against jihad is niaive at best. The domino effect is a fallacy. The idea that a. Iraq would transition into a democracy without civil war and b. that a democracy would undermine jihad is simply fantasy.

If the Repugnants are willing to hound Clinton over a BJ, they should be hounding Bush for his treason...
 
anyone with a grip on reality recognises that bringing democracy to Iraq is an ideal that in the context of our current battle against jihad is niaive at best.

Well, this was originally a Clinton Administration idea, so perhaps you are right. I happen to believe you must defeat an ideology with a counter-ideology, and short of that, there is no other effective way to do it. If we hope to defeat radical Islamofascism, our greatest hope lies in Democracy.

You are free to think otherwise, but honestly, you talk like someone who just wants Democracies to fail so Socialism will reign supreme over all the land. You make no valid point, you just flail away at Democracy and Freedom, as if it were a bad thing that we should be ashamed of promoting and fighting for.
 
You are free to think otherwise, but honestly, you talk like someone who just wants Democracies to fail so Socialism will reign supreme over all the land.

Hardly, when I am a Democratic Socialist.

I just don't think democracy is a magic elixier that can cure the problems that we are experiencing, as some like you do. Introducing democracy in Iraq, for example, brings a Shia majority into a massive position of strength over the Sunni, which due to historical events can be utilised by the Shia. This simply causes more problems, that contribute to the armoury of the Jihadists.

The notion that if you hold a ballot in Iraq, it undermines the jihadists is attempting to create an over-simplistic solution to the problem.
 
Dixie said:
anyone with a grip on reality recognises that bringing democracy to Iraq is an ideal that in the context of our current battle against jihad is niaive at best.

Well, this was originally a Clinton Administration idea, so perhaps you are right. I happen to believe you must defeat an ideology with a counter-ideology, and short of that, there is no other effective way to do it. If we hope to defeat radical Islamofascism, our greatest hope lies in Democracy.

You are free to think otherwise, but honestly, you talk like someone who just wants Democracies to fail so Socialism will reign supreme over all the land. You make no valid point, you just flail away at Democracy and Freedom, as if it were a bad thing that we should be ashamed of promoting and fighting for.
Click to expand...

Have you no shame? No remorse? You and your idiotic president have unleashed the hounds of hell, in a nation that did not threaten america:



Over 130 killed in Baghdad car bombings
CNN 11/23/2006

Six car bombs killed more than 130 people Thursday in Baghdad's Sadr City, according to Iraq's health minister. Police had conflicting numbers for those killed and wounded, but Health Minister Ali Shummari said the death toll is 133, with 201 wounded.

Earlier, police said three car bombings and a mortar round firing occurred within a 30-minute period in Sadr City, a densely populated Shiite slum in northeastern Baghdad.

The minister said a missile was fired in addition to the car blasts.

In a separate incident, police also said U.S. forces killed four people Thursday when they opened fire on a minibus in Sadr City.

********************************************************

Violence Spiking All over Iraq
Mercury News -- Iraqis are dying in record numbers and fleeing by the tens of thousands from an anarchic nation where armed men rule the streets and there's little faith in government institutions, according to a United Nations report released Wednesday.

The 3,709 Iraqis killed in October was the highest monthly toll since the U.S.-led invasion in 2003. Hundreds of the bodies turned up bound and blindfolded, with signs of torture and execution-style killings.
 
Dixie your right about the democracy, but the big problem is getting a democray that doesn't have a basis in islam. The democray must have no religious ties. At present the iraq democray has islam as a state religion, this will cause it to eventually fail and become a theocracy.

Best we can do is protect and establish the government then hope for the best. The tribal mentality and division between sunni and shea will continue to cause violent clashes. They still have a middleages mind set with technology to cause mass destruction and killing.

I'm still for a larger force in iraq and seal off the borders to prevent material being brought into the country to arm the insergents. And a quick decisive attack on sadr to take him out. Not taking him down years ago has allowed all that is going on today to continue. He's irans main man in iraq.
 
Gaffer said:
Dixie your right about the democracy, but the big problem is getting a democray that doesn't have a basis in islam. The democray must have no religious ties. At present the iraq democray has islam as a state religion, this will cause it to eventually fail and become a theocracy.

Best we can do is protect and establish the government then hope for the best. The tribal mentality and division between sunni and shea will continue to cause violent clashes. They still have a middleages mind set with technology to cause mass destruction and killing.

I'm still for a larger force in iraq and seal off the borders to prevent material being brought into the country to arm the insergents. And a quick decisive attack on sadr to take him out. Not taking him down years ago has allowed all that is going on today to continue. He's irans main man in iraq.
Click to expand...

There are several recipe's for democracy, including ones with an ordained 'state religion', in fact, our very own founding fathers contemplated such systems when they created our democracy. The main reason they didn't go with one, was because of the experience with the Church of England, and the fear that government would corrupt any national religion. Our Constitution did include something unique, it guaranteed freedom of religion... so does Iraq's Constitution. The 'truth's that we held self evident' took several years to forge, to debate and iron out the details, and in some cases, downright fight over. What Iraq has accomplished in just a few short years, is nothing short of miraculous, considering these people have never known democracy.

I disagree with any notion of Iraq turning into a theocracy, this can't happen any more than America is going to turn into a Christian theocracy. While, I suppose it's theoretically possible, it's just not very probable. Regardless of what you think are the risks in this, they do not detract from the point of establishing a counter-ideology to the fanatical Islamist ideology we are battling, which is the entire key to victory. The tricky part is, "WE" can't do it... these people aren't stupid sheep, who will simply follow Uncle Sam to the path of righteousness in this. "WE" meaning, the US, Israel, and our allies, can't change a single heart or mind of a radical fundamental Islamist, the only hope for that, lies with the people around them, fellow Arabs, fellow Muslims, Free and Democratic Iraqi's.

Those who spin the notion that we are forcing democracy down their throats at gunpoint, are not understanding the importance of forming a functional and working democratic 'pro-western' government and economy, in that particular part of the world. It's not because we hate them, and want them to live like Americans! It's because, democratic government allows for the voice of the people to be heard, through representative government, and peaceful civil protest. Arab people, are just like American people or French people, they will voice their opinion, when allowed to by government. If Democracy succeeds in Iraq, how it has in other regions, with the national resources they have, as well as cultural history and archaeological significance, they will likely be a world superpower in the decades to come. At that point, Iraq becomes a 'role model' for the rest of the middle east. We're talking 50 years here.

This is a vision, I realize that. It does require belief in the power of Democracy and Freedom, and some people are found to be lacking.

Iraqi Democracy will crush Islamofascism, in principle, and it makes sense, because we know from experience, democracies don't fight with each other, they trade and negotiate. There are always going to be movements, there are always people with complaint and dissent, that is one of the beauties and sometimes curses of democracy.

The problem is the outside influences, and continued funding, supplying, and aiding to the insurgency, in an attempt to topple the democracy. I don't need to get into a debate over the vast and intricate details, players, motivations, and reasons for this... they all oppose a democracy in Iraq, that is the key issue for me. It makes Iraq a vital part of the overall war on terror, and crucial that we prevail, and Iraq's democracy prevails.

The thing that is bothering me the most is, the foolish way people seem to be taking their eye off the ball here, and paying almost no attention to the problem east of Iraq. In my opinion, we have a much more important concern there, and we better start realizing it, fast. Iran's purpose in fueling insurgents in Iraq, is to detract from what they are developing as we speak. While we are all mulling over what to do with Iraq, we have a much more lethal and deadly threat looming, and he's practically telegraphing what he is about to do. Shall we simply wait until we're bind-sided?
 
And a quick decisive attack on sadr to take him out. Not taking him down years ago has allowed all that is going on today to continue. He's irans main man in iraq.

I think that Bush, in a purely bipartisan gesture, should appoint John Kerry to go talk to Sadr... have him go and find out what Sadr wants and needs, and let him see if he can fix it for us. Kerry is so smart like that, you know?
 
but the big problem is getting a democray that doesn't have a basis in islam.

Yes it does.

One of the schisms between Sunni and Shia is that the Shia believe that the descendents of Muhammed should lead the religion, whilst the Sunni believe that the leaders of Islam should be elected.
 
" If Democracy succeeds in Iraq, how it has in other regions, with the national resources they have, as well as cultural history and archaeological significance, they will likely be a world superpower in the decades to come. At that point, Iraq becomes a 'role model' for the rest of the middle east."

This kind of stuff just makes me feel bad for Dixie...
 
" If Democracy succeeds in Iraq, how it has in other regions, with the national resources they have, as well as cultural history and archaeological significance, they will likely be a world superpower in the decades to come. At that point, Iraq becomes a 'role model' for the rest of the middle east."

Its all just idealistic fantasy.

Anyone who knew anything about Iraq knows that the huge schism in Iraqi society will result in civil war. There is a reason Iraq has been held by a succession of brutal controlling forces.

It is extraordinarily niaive to believe that if you hold a ballot, all of a society's problems will be resolved.
 
"If Democracy succeeds in Iraq, how it has in other regions, with the national resources they have, as well as cultural history and archaeological significance, they will likely be a world superpower in the decades to come. At that point, Iraq becomes a 'role model' for the rest of the middle east. We're talking 50 years here.

This is a vision, I realize that. It does require belief in the power of Democracy and Freedom, and some people are found to be lacking.

Iraqi Democracy will crush Islamofascism, in principle, and it makes sense, because we know from experience, democracies don't fight with each other, they trade and negotiate."

This is just sad Dixie. I realize when the WMD went missing, you had to change your primary argument in favor of the war, but this is hopelessly naive.

The most powerful man in Iraq is Muqtada Al Sadr. If a vote were held today between Al Sadr, Saddam Hussein, and one of the pro-western "democrats" (i.e., Chalabi or Allawi) Al Sadr would wins hands down. And Saddam would come in second place. Chalabi or Allawi would be a distand third.


Holding a vote is not demonstrative of a democracy. Democracy and "voting" is simply a tool that can be used for either good or evil. Giving a government over to the tyranny of the majority, is a recipe for disaster in this part of the world. The Shia simply see the excercise of "voting" as a way to wrest power from the sunnis. To disenfranchise them. This is the opposite of a republican-form of democracy.

Democracy is not something that can take root by simply holding a vote. Democracy is an ideology and a human value that took hundreds of years to blossom in the western world.
 
As you said Dixie, its going to take at least a generation to clean the radicals out of iraq and its government. And I agree the monster to the east is a very important threat. I still believe more troops along the borders would help a lot. And maybe it will get iran to push militarily before its really ready and give us the excuse we need to move on them.

I like the idea of sadr and kerry in the same room. :rolleyes:
 
Dixie said:
Hey Dixie.... aren't you PROUD of what you and your stupid administration has unleashed upon the Iraqi people?

Hey Maine... aren't you PROUD of what your DEMOCRAT controlled Congress continues to fund and support?

Let's get something straight... your days of sitting on the sideline heckling the home team, are over. Your party controls Congress, therefore, they control the war. It's just as easy for me to play the 'emotive appeal' card and lay the blame on the Democrats now, so if that is your answer and solution to the problem, we can just sit here and point fingers at each other and act like 10-year-olds.

I think most people are tired of listening to your shit, and expect you to start leading and stop bitching. You were doing pretty good in this thread, until you started losing the debate, then you reverted back to the old "Blame Bush" mode, and that simply will not work for you anymore, your party is in charge.
Click to expand...
Newsflash Dixie: my party will not control congress until January. And even if we have to continue to support some level of troop involvement in order to extricate ourselves properly, make no mistake....this terrible terrible war and its groteque and bloody result is ALL the fault of YOUR stupid administration. We will try our best to UN-FUCK this situation as rapidly as we can, but you really need to acknowledge that your team has dug us a pretty deep hole and filled it with blood and shit and red ink. We'll clean up your mess, but I will NEVER let you off the hook for having caused this debacle in the first place.
 
Dixie said:
In answer to your question. I think America ought to always act first and foremost to further her own enlightened self interest.

This wasn't an answer, it was a dodge. But that's okay, it clearly indicates what your real sentiments are. You don't feel particularly compelled to stand up for democracy, and you think America should remain neutral on such issues. That's how I figured you felt, I just needed to ask the direct question to clarify it. Your decision to give some meaningless platitude, instead of answering the question, tells me all I need to know. Thanks.
Click to expand...

I think ENCOURAGING democracy around the globe is almost always in America's enlightened self interest.

I do NOT think that cramming democracy down the throat of an Islamic arab country at the point of a gun held by an invading, conquering, occupying army of Christians serves that self-interest in the least.

And I have been saying that for years now.... and you have been saying that I was wrong and that a vibrant, multicultural Jeffersonian democracy was blossoming in the fertile triangle shining like a beacon of freedom that would change the entire region's politics.

Here the line on that issue now: I was right. YOU were wrong. You would be really wise to admit that.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top