Tuesday, July 17, 2007

Supporting the War - Why we must win in Iraq

In my previous post, Shane referenced a couple of posts I made several months ago. It gave me a chance to reread them and reflect on what I had said. I'm very happy with what I wrote and wanted to actually expand on a point I brought up here.

I believe that Iraq is the front line in the war on terror. We are there to stabilize the region by helping Iraq democratize. I believe that spreading freedom and liberty is a good thing. It is in our county's best interest to have stability in the Middle East. Frankly, we need a free flow of oil. By doing so, they can have peace and prosperity and stop hating and resenting the USA.

It is critical that we set up a long term base of operations in Iraq. We must be a presence in this region that is a hotbed and training ground for terrorists. By our being there we will stabilize the area and provide hope for the vast majority of the peace loving population. We can eliminate Muslim Extremest Terrorism by being there. If we leave now, the terrorists will overtake these countries and create a situation that will imperil the US and the rest of the western world.

16 comments:

  1. Colby Natale7/17/2007 1:12 PM

    "By our being there we will stabilize the area"

    Any idea when that stabilizing will start?

    ReplyDelete
  2. As a war supporter I will admit that it has not gone well, but we must ask what would happen if we left? I am guessing that millions of innocents would be slaughtered just like after we left Vietnam. Plus the people who want to cut your head off won’t just go away; in fact I believe they would be emboldened to do even worse attacks. There is a mindset in much of the Middle East that accepts children being used as bombs, women being used as slaves, and head removal to be sanctioned by god. I am sure we all agree that this mindset needs to change before real peace can insure. I think democracy is the best path to creating real and lasting peace and is worth fighting for. Obviously some of you don’t think staying and fighting for democracy will work, so I ask what is your solution?

    ReplyDelete
  3. As a war supporter I will admit that it has not gone well, but we must ask what would happen if we left?

    Why? Why "must" we ask that? They can't run their own country? I'm sorry. I don't remember ever pledging allegiance to the flag of a peaceful Iraq. We broke it, but we can't fix it. Quit demanding that I pay to do what we can't do.

    I am guessing that millions of innocents would be slaughtered just like after we left Vietnam.

    You got a real convenient idea of what is an "innocent". You're probably right about the numbers, though. Civil war is just kinda nasty like that. However ... we could attempt to relocate the Sunni to Sunni-friendly areas like are held by our "good friends" the Saudis. I'm sure they'd be all for that.

    Plus the people who want to cut your head off won’t just go away;

    Nope, they won't. But at least we'd actually have the means to fight them where they really are (Pakistan, Afganistan, Saudi Arabia) instead of wasting our time in Mesopotamia.

    There is a mindset in much of the Middle East that accepts children being used as bombs, women being used as slaves, and head removal to be sanctioned by god.

    OOOhhhh! Scawy! There was a mindset in 1700 America that said that people should crush scawy women-folk under boards covered with stones SANCTIONED BY GOD!!!. That didn't change because we bombed those idiots into submission.

    I am sure we all agree that this mindset needs to change before real peace can insure.

    "Insure?" And how can this happen when we firebomb entire cities? Falluja, anyone? I don't think we have the credibility on the liberty scale that you do. Sadly, most knowledgeable people tend to agree with me.

    I think democracy is the best path to creating real and lasting peace and is worth fighting for.

    I agree. Peace through superior will (and unbridled use of firepower). Do what I say and you will be free ...

    Obviously some of you don’t think staying and fighting for democracy will work, so I ask what is your solution?

    Good God, Ryan. Democratic principles worked for us because we wanted those things, and we were willing to fight for them. We had a very rare convergence of individuals like Thomas Paine, George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin and John Adams to lead the way. The Iraqis don't have that. You spout off about Democracy without even considering what Democracy is about. It's about the individual asserting his will for a common cause. In Iraq, there are a bunch of folks who just want to kill a bunch of other folks. The Sunni want to stay alive. The Shi'ites want payback and control. This isn't like our Revolution, and even if it were, we couldn't fight it for them. This is a civil war, among and between Iraqis. All we can do is die in the middle.

    Now I'm certain that you'll be all about the al Qaeda any moment now, but take heart. The Shi'ites don't like al Qaeda. The Sunni's don't trust al Qaeda. We leave, and al Qaeda in Iraq is toast.

    Yes, Iraq would probably become a satellite of Iran. But, unless we declare war on the Shia majority, and their military wing, the Mujahideen, that will happen anyway. And here's the punchline: that means killing off over a quarter of the remaining population of the country, just to have "peace". Some f'ing freedom, huh?

    Because we never should have invaded in the first place, yes, it's well past time that we get the hell out.

    (Knowing full well that we will have to commit a genocide to bring "peace" to Iraq, I now await the inevitable BS about rape rooms and people shredders. Hey, 'guess you can't make an omelette without breaking a few heads ...)

    ReplyDelete
  4. Similar thing were said about Japan in 1943.

    Democratic principles worked for us because we wanted those things, and we were willing to fight for them. We had a very rare convergence of individuals like Thomas Paine, George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin and John Adams to lead the way. The Iraqis don't have that.
    I completely disagree. I believe everyone wants freedom. Your rose picture of our past isn't all that honest. It took us 11 years from the war of independence until we had a constitution. There was much difficulty along the way. How do we know that a few strong freedom lovers won't emerge in Iraq? Our troops are currently getting a huge upsurge of tip on terrorist activities by everyday citizens who want peace.

    Their are many in Iraqi who want peace and freedom. Just look at http://iraqthemodel.blogspot.com/.
    I am not willing to let them get slaughtered. It saddens me that you are.

    I'm still not clear on what you recommend we do to change mindsets and create real peace in the middle east?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Colby,
    Does it really matter when the stabilizing starts? It's important to look at the long term and see what's best for the future. Giving these people hope, freedom, and stability is crucial to them and the rest of the world.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Similar thing were said about Japan in 1943.


    Ryan, I hate to have to clarify, but we weren't occupying Japan in 1943. We had to destroy three cities before they 'recognized our authoritay'. Iraq is experiencing an occupation, a civil war, and an insurgency all at the same time. Please clarify exactly what that has analogous to Japan in 1943?

    Your rose picture of our past isn't all that honest. It took us 11 years from the war of independence until we had a constitution. There was much difficulty along the way.

    Difficulty like ... blowing each other up? I'm not the one being dishonest here, Ryan. And please note that when Alexander Hamilton disagreed with Thomas Jefferson, he didn't run to an occupying force and claim that Jeffersonian cronies were barbequing babies, while he plotted to blow up Jefferson's church. That is exactly what is happening in Iraq.

    Their are many in Iraqi who want peace and freedom. Just look at http://iraqthemodel.blogspot.com/.
    I am not willing to let them get slaughtered. It saddens me that you are.


    So who do you save? The Shi'ite Mujahideen? The Sunni who hate the fact that they are now second class citizens? Come on, Ryan, who do you save? And why aren't you over there doing it? See, you don't show up at my door every morning spending other's money to guard me from harm. I believe in peace and freedom. Why should I trust that you actually give a crap about Iraqis when you won't defend me? What's that? You think I should defend myself? I do. Save your sadness, Ryan. It's condescending and hypocritical.

    I'm still not clear on what you recommend we do to change mindsets and create real peace in the middle east?

    When in the F@(K did it become my job to do so, or pay to have it done? It never has, and it never will. No one oppressed me for 20+ years, and you can't change my mind. What in the hell makes you think that you can change the mind of the Shi'ites in Iraq? You can't, Ryan, and killing the next generatio of Iraqis is a really poor way to go about trying.

    ReplyDelete
  7. But at least we'd actually have the means to fight them where they really are (Pakistan, Afganistan, Saudi Arabia) instead of wasting our time in Mesopotamia.

    How do you propose we go into Pakistan and Saudi Arabia and fight them? I doubt you are implying we should “invade” these places? I have an idea. Lets go into an important place in the center of the Middle East that will piss them off and draw them to us where we can kill them…how about Iraq?



    Please clarify exactly what that has analogous to Japan in 1943? (1945, I have fat fingers)

    Don’t play stupid. You know damn well that Japan had a radical ideology. Kamikaze was considered and honor. Few at the time would have thought that Japan could have become such a strong democracy. I believe the same can happen in the Middle East and it saddens me that you have so little faith in humanity.

    So who do you save? The Shi'ite Mujahideen? The Sunni who hate the fact that they are now second class citizens? Come on, Ryan, who do you save?

    We don’t have to choose whom to save. We just have to get them to a point where their democracy can stand on it own.

    See, you don't show up at my door every morning spending other's money to guard me from harm. I believe in peace and freedom. Why should I trust that you actually give a crap about Iraqis when you won't defend me?

    Even though your ideas are wacky, if I knew someone was trying to kill you I absolutely would show up at your door and try save you using my weapons that may on your side want to take away.

    When in the F@(K did it become my job to do so, or pay to have it done? It never has, and it never will. No one oppressed me for 20+ years, and you can't change my mind. What in the hell makes you think that you can change the mind of the Shi'ites in Iraq? You can't, Ryan, and killing the next generatio of Iraqis is a really poor way to go about trying.

    It really would help your cause if you could come up with a better solution than; lets get out and let them rot. Your membership the “compassionate liberal” ideology would also be more believable if you had a solution other than... screw the good people in Iraq.

    You can't, Ryan, and killing the next generation of Iraqis is a really poor way to go about trying.

    This statement clearly shows your wacky mindset. It is shameful for you to say our troops are killing a generation. Our amazing troops often put themselves into harms way to avoid hurting any innocents.
    I believe we can change the minds in the Middle East and democracy is the ticket. I know a nice couple from Iran and they would love to live in freedom. The evil “head chopping” mindset won’t go away on its own and I believe if we don’t do the difficult steps now we will have to take even more difficult actions down the road. It will be a slow process and it will likely get worse before it gets better, but at least I propose an idea. If you can’t come up with anything better, at least get out of the way of those of us who are trying.

    ReplyDelete
  8. We don’t have to choose whom to save. We just have to get them to a point where their democracy can stand on it own.

    This is the only real disagreement that you and I have, Ryan. You keep promoting Democracy as if it is the solution to the problem, but that really answers nothing, does it? I agree, Democracy in Iraq would be just peachy swell! For all your blather about how I don't have a better idea, it is necessary to point out that not once have you offered a plan for achieving "Democracy" in Iraq, except the status quo (keep killing folks until they agree to agree?) Their government is failing. As I've pointed out on numerous occasions, their security forces are dominated by Shi'ite Mujahideen, who are often behaving as thug-like as the Sunni militias who have been bombing mosques. So you tell me, Ryan, how do we get the Pony? How we 'give them' Democracy if they don't want it?

    The only plan I've heard that makes any sense is to partition the different ethics groups off from each other. But that is beside the point of this discussion, mostly because we aren't even attempting that.

    I believe the same can happen in the Middle East and it saddens me that you have so little faith in humanity.

    What absolute pap! You're still arguing that Apples are the same as Oranges based on your own unfounded faith while you're questioning my faith in something completely unrelated? Join me back in reality-land and maybe we can get somewhere. (That's a fun way of saying that your thinking bears no resemblance to logic or reason. There are no similarities between Nipponese nationalism and extreme Islam. There are no similarities between a crushed and defeated Japan and current Iraq.)

    It really would help your cause if you could come up with a better solution than; lets get out and let them rot. Your membership the “compassionate liberal” ideology would also be more believable if you had a solution other than... screw the good people in Iraq.

    1st) No it wouldn't help my cause. There have been many better ideas, including Biden's 2005 proposal for a soft partition solution. The Clueless Idiot in Chief remains opposed to anything different except more of the same with added SURGE! And the Iraqis are no closer to Democracy then they were 2 years ago. It's not working. It hasn't been working. It's not going to work. So, if we're not going to do anything different, and what we're doing isn't working, the only other option is to leave. (The definition of insanity: doing the same thing over and over expecting different results. Only in quantum physics does that ever happen.)

    2nd) Your claims about "compassionate liberal ideology" are nothing more than a lame concern-troll. If you want to know why I was against the invasion of Iraq since before we did it, then ask me. But keep your straw-man fantasies to yourself.

    As an addendum to that, though, I do find it rather surprising that I, being all unconcerned about the poor Iraqis and all, have such a marvelously better understanding of who they are, and why they're fighting us (and each other) than you, who are so desperately concerned that they be Democratic ... and I do notice that you rarely reference them being 'free'.

    3rd) 'Screw the good people of Iraq' appears to be what they're doing to themselves. Who are you or I to disagree with such a Democratic will?

    It is shameful for you to say our troops are killing a generation. Our amazing troops often put themselves into harms way to avoid hurting any innocents.

    I was waiting for the appeal to false ideological/moral authority, and here it is. Maybe you missed the memo, but the job, purpose and reason for being of the US military is to kill. Mostly we kill the enemy. Quite often (especially with bombs) we inflict 'collateral damage'. That some individuals bravely go out of their way to keep from doing that in no way mitigates or detracts from the reason that the military is there: to kill. The math is pretty simple, Ryan. The longer we're there, the more people we will kill. The more the Iraqis take up arms against each other (catching us in the middle) the more people we will kill. Despite your rather weaselly attempt to make me look like a poor suplicant at the feet of the almighty US fighting man, they are there to do a job. That job isn't to hand out candy and puppies, so kudos to them when they do. The job is kill until the enemy is gone. Since we've already established that you can't define who that enemy is, the equation is a dead-certain lock: the longer the military stays to do its job, the more Iraqis will die.

    I believe we can change the minds in the Middle East and democracy is the ticket. I know a nice couple from Iran and they would love to live in freedom. The evil “head chopping” mindset won’t go away on its own and I believe if we don’t do the difficult steps now we will have to take even more difficult actions down the road. It will be a slow process and it will likely get worse before it gets better, but at least I propose an idea.

    No, Ryan. What you've proposed is a notion. What you've based it on is a 'faith'. There is no idea there because you can't tell anyone how where supposed to make your notion a reality, other than to continue killing people. What I propose is an idea, and a plan to make it real. And that's to get the hell out of Iraq. Unlike you, I've supported my idea with reason ,logic and consequence. And yet, the most laughable response you offer is that I don't have an idea. Yes I do, you just don't like it, and like a child are stomping your feet demanding that I turn *your* notion into my idea. That's not going to happen, Ryan. Your notion is unrealistic; your faith is misplaced.

    Now, why don't you take your own advice. Get yourself, your obstructing Republicant congress critters, and your clueless administration, and get out of the way of the majority of Americans who really are trying to fulfill their idea. Or, you can keep clapping. I'm certain Democracy will bloom in Iraq just as soon as Tinkerbell recovers from her swoon (or as soon as we've killed enough Iraqis that the rest of them are too scared of us not want their ... "freedom").

    ReplyDelete
  9. Wulfgar, you know I love you, so take a few deep breaths and maybe relax with a cold beer for a moment. You deserve one after all that typing. We don’t have universal healthcare yet, so I wouldn’t want you to pop your top;).

    Amongst all your snide comments all you really said is that freedom/democracy in Iraq is impossible. I simply disagree. 79% of the people in Iran want democracy (http://www.newsmax.com /archives/articles/2007/7/16/220455.shtml), so why do you think they don’t in Iraq? Rome wasn’t built in day and nor will a free Iraq.

    You are also very good at twisting what I say, then ranting away on a false notion. I never asked for your plan in Iraq. I know what that is…run home. I have been asking for your ideas on how to change the evil mindset found in much of the Middle East. The mindset that chops off heads, blows up children, and runs airplanes into buildings. I say freedom/democracy is the key, what do you propose?

    Let me see if I can sum up our disagreement. You think democracy in Iraq/The Middle East can never happen, so we should pull back a let the “evil doers” and unfortunately the good people wallow in more misery for the next ten thousands years. I assume your strategy to prevent more attacks at home is to put a good defense…maybe some NSA wiretaps? Did I get close?

    I think reform/freedom/democracy is possible and should be supported especially since it is obviously the “evil doers” don’t plan on staying in the Middle East. You ask my plan to create a democracy, which makes me wonder what world you live in. Iraq is a democracy. They had three elections and have a constitution. While I admit their government isn’t doing a very good job, that doesn’t make them any less a democracy. You think our current government is doing a shit job…are we not a democracy? If bombs were going off in 1780, should Washington and Jefferson given up?

    If we follow your idea and pull out we are doomed to battle this enemy for the next ten thousand years on our shores and occasionally theirs, killing god know how may on both sides.

    If we follow my idea, at least there is a chance for lasting peace and freedom. I’m sure glad I wear my shoes. I may live in fantasy land, but it is still a hell of a lot better than your would.

    Since the commander in chief gets to decide and he clearly is going to keep working towards democracy, don’t you think we should at least go all out and do everything we can to make it work. After all you agreed that a free Iraq would be “just peachy swell “. When Hillary is prez then we can pull out. But let me make a prediction…she keeps us in Iraq.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Since it appears that we are getting closer to common ground, a few points of clarification:

    1) Though I think we have achieved a tenuous level of mutual admiration, we should honestly admit that though we may respect the other person, neither of us respect the other's idea of how to proceed (or not) in Iraq. Your derisive generalizations, and my snide comments are all related to that, and should not be taken as Ad Hominem. That is a good thing.

    2) Amongst all your snide comments all you really said is that freedom/democracy in Iraq is impossible.

    That is a mis-characterization, but an understandable one. I believe, quite simply, that Democracy is not possible in Iraq at this time. We have severely mucked up the works. Also, keep in mind, Iran is not Iraq. Iraq has at least 6 different identifiable ethnic groups, most of whom don't like each other at all. Iran is vastly more homogeneous.

    3) You keep equivocating between our action in Iraq, and our action in the Middle East as a whole, and request that I do the same. No. What we are doing in Iraq a) making the whole of our Middle Eastern standing worse, b) creating more of the very terrorists that we both agree we should be killing, c) prohibiting us from using our resources where they would be better applied to foster our war against terrorists (we're bogged down and reacting instead of acting) and d) my biggest complaint, bankrupting our own people, our own children, for a pointless endevour.

    As to "how to bring peace to the Middle East", I don't know how to do it. Every President since Kennedy has tried, and they've all made some progress ... except 43. The reason is simple, you don't war for peace. That's counter=productive. I do have other ideas, but seriously, as I'm certain that you do too. But not a one of them amounts to a hill of beans while we are caught in the untennable situation in Iraq. And FYI, talk of good and evil mindsets is part of the problem, not the solution. Just because somebody wants to kill you in horrid ways doesn't make them evil, it makes them an enemy. Killing everybody around them is highly unlikely to change their mind.

    4) You think democracy in Iraq/The Middle East can never happen, so we should pull back a let the “evil doers” and unfortunately the good people wallow in more misery for the next ten thousands years. I assume your strategy to prevent more attacks at home is to put a good defense…maybe some NSA wiretaps? Did I get close?

    Not even in the same county.

    5) You ask my plan to create a democracy, which makes me wonder what world you live in. Iraq is a democracy. They had three elections and have a constitution. While I admit their government isn’t doing a very good job, that doesn’t make them any less a democracy.

    Then let's get the hell out. Mission accomplished ... unless you believe as I do that their Democracy is so terrible fragile, it won't survive without the force of the US behind it? Truth is, their Democracy doesn't seem to be surviving *with* the force of the US behind it.

    6) You think our current government is doing a shit job…are we not a democracy?

    Half our nation isn't trying to kill or subjugate another third. I'd say we're doing okay comparatively.

    7) If bombs were going off in 1780, should Washington and Jefferson given up?

    Very bad analogy. Washington and Jefferson weren't the French trying to maintain order while the British sent in suicide bombers into a slave rebellion between blacks and whites. That might make a nice novel, but it certainly has nothing to do with Iraq. You'd be better off looking at the civil war for analogy. Only 620,000 dead, the costliest war in our history. Notice, no other nation was stupid enough to try fostering "peace" between the American nations. Hell, you almost have to respect the British for playing both sides off each other (they needed ships, they needed cotton.)

    8) If we follow your idea and pull out we are doomed to battle this enemy for the next ten thousand years on our shores and occasionally theirs, killing god know how may on both sides.

    No. No we're not. There is no evidence for this, whatsoever. If you have any, kindly offer it. And isn't it striking to you that the same argument was made about Vietnam lo about 35 year ago? My NFL logo gear is made there now.

    9) If we follow my idea, at least there is a chance for lasting peace and freedom. I’m sure glad I wear my shoes. I may live in fantasy land, but it is still a hell of a lot better than your would.

    I thought I was pretty specific about that part. No. If we follow your idea there is just more war. I cannot wrap my head around the idea that the military will bring peace ... unless it kills any who would oppose our will. That's what happened in Germany and Japan way on back there in '45. Is that what you propose for Iraq? If not, and you still want to follow the same course we are on, then get ready for a whole bunch more killin', cause that what soldiers do.

    10) Since the commander in chief gets to decide and he clearly is going to keep ...

    Doing the same thing? That's kinda the problem right there, isn't it?

    Craig posted a remarkable video the other day. If you have a chance, check it out. You might find that you agree with me more than you think.

    ReplyDelete
  11. You seem to paint a picture of a complete and total lawless Iraq that I just don’t see and it is allowing you to feel the situation is hopeless. I see it to when I listen to our media, but when I hear soldier accounts and read Iraqi blogs I see a lot of semi normal life in much of the country. I see many good Iraqi people asking us to say. I see Iraqi “women and children tapping using plastic pipes to tap on streetlamps and other metal objects to warn when extremists were in the area planting roadside bombs”. I see prosperity in the north. I see a chance to bring sweeping change to an area the sorely needs it.

    Not as bad as you think #1
    Not as bad as you think #2
    Not as bad as you think #3 – Soldier don’t like the media
    Not as bad as you think #4
    Not as bad as you think #5
    Not as bad as you think #5 - lots of Iraqi help
    We can win #1
    We can win #2 - Iraqis want help
    Must Read

    -keep killing folks until they agree to agree
    -Killing everybody around them is highly unlikely to change their mind.
    -Do what I say and you will be free ...


    You have implied this a number of times and it seems to be your view on what is widely happening. Again I just don’t see it. We aren’t killing the innocents, the terrorists are. The good Iraqi people aren’t stupid. They know we aren’t the enemy and this is proven by all the tips we keep getting from the people. You don’t find thousands of weapons caches and hideouts by chance.

    The reason is simple, you don't war for peace.
    You said this a few times, but our peacefulness before 9-11 brought war. Peace doesn’t work against this enemy. War unfortunately is our only option and you know war has brought peace may times.

    And FYI, talk of good and evil mindsets is part of the problem, not the solution. Just because somebody wants to kill you in horrid ways doesn't make them evil, it makes them an enemy.

    Again a fundament disagreement that allows many with your similar views to slightly excuse the evil. Anyone who blow themselves up in a market is EVIL. I call a spade a spade.

    No. No we're not. There is no evidence for this, whatsoever. If you have any, kindly offer it. And isn't it striking to you that the same argument was made about Vietnam lo about 35 year ago? My NFL logo gear is made there now.

    You don’t think Iraq will be come the next Al Qaeda headquarters if we leave? They will setup camp slaughtering along the way. The morale boost from their “win” would likely allow them to recruit even more than they are now, which would make us even less safe. Then after another big attack (pray it isn’t WMD) on our shore in a few years we will have to go in again all over again. Why don’t we just finish it now? As for Vietnam, it only took a few million slaughtered to get you that gear. If we had finished that job which was very close they would likely be making computer chips not slave labor NFL gear.

    As to "how to bring peace to the Middle East", I don't know how to do it. Every President since Kennedy has tried, and they've all made some progress ... except 43.

    I disagree. All the work of other president only culminated in 9-11. I think we both agree that freedom and peace in the Middle East is something that needs to happen before we can be safe at home. Since nothing else has worked (9-11 was planned during the “peaceful” Clinton years), why don’t we do all we can to at least try the democracy route. We are very close. The Surge was just recently completed. Petraeus’ (who the Dems supported unanimously but aren’t giving him a chance) first report isn’t even due until Sept. Iraq has a constitution and a standing democratic government. All we need to do is get their troops up to snuff. Then if their government can get off their asses and get the oil revenue distributed to the people and get the utilities running more consistent to pacify the people we can win this thing. These aren’t insurmountable tasks.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Ryan, it really might surprise you to find out that I read much of the same material that you do. What you see as 'hope', I see as whistling past a graveyard. McCain proved just how "semi-normal" much of the country is. Life will go on regardless of insurgency, civil war and sectarian power struggles. That shouldn't be our focus or concern. Our focus should be: can *they* build a peaceful country? All your happy anecdotes still point to no.

    You have implied this a number of times and it seems to be your view on what is widely happening. Again I just don’t see it. We aren’t killing the innocents, the terrorists are.

    I haven't implied that at all. I've flat out said it. The bolded part is the part you really need to get over, because it doesn't fit the facts. At my place, I posted a chart of who is attacking who. The vast majority of attacks perpetrated in Iraq are Iraqi against Iraqi. Sunni against Shi'ite and vice-versa. It's almost laughable that we just name them "terrorists" and call it good. That's called circular reasoning, and it's a piss-poor basis for a foreign policy.

    What' really funny, in a nauseating kind of way, is what isn't listed on that chart. That chart doesn't list the number of attacks that we carry out, or who we actually kill while doing so. Our circular reasoning tells us that they are all terrorists. You're smarter than that Ryan. Do you really stand behind the statement that "we don't kill innocents"? (Now I will agree whole heartedly with the statement that 'quite often we don;t kill innocents willingly ... quite often.')

    You said this a few times, but our peacefulness before 9-11 brought war. Peace doesn’t work against this enemy.

    Peace, like occupied bases in the Muslim holy lands? Peace, like cruise missiles into Yemen? Peace, like warships cruising the coastlines of known hostile countries? Peace, like supplying Saddam with chemical weapons he used against Iran (and his own folks) supplying Israel with nukes? Peace, like indescriminate bombing over a Muslim country just to terrify a dictator (it wasn't Saddam's forces dying in the "no fly zones"). You and I got an all together 'difernt idear' of peace, Ryan.

    War unfortunately is our only option and you know war has brought peace may times.

    No, Ryan. Peace is not simply the absence of fighting. War has brought us victory many times. What we did after the war brought peace. I could go into a ton of examples, including the somewhat failed 'peace' after the "War of Northern Agression", as some still call it, but I'll just let you think on it, for a while. Or would you like to argue that there was 'peace' in Vietnam after they won the war because we 'cut and ran'?

    Again a fundament disagreement that allows many with your similar views to slightly excuse the evil. Anyone who blow themselves up in a market is EVIL. I call a spade a spade.

    And I call a club a club .. that statement is a moral club, except that I think it has a bit of termite rot. When I was Sunday school, I was taught that all children are the beloved of Jesus, and that to kill a child is evil. The US military has done that many times in this war. So, unless you're willing to back off from that spade a little (admit your own moral relativism), you might want to admit that talk of good and evil is a little misplaced and counter-productive here.

    You don’t think Iraq will be come the next Al Qaeda headquarters if we leave?

    Why should it when they have Afghanistan and Pakistan? No. You've given me no reason (despite the doomsday fantasies) to think that al Qaeda would take over in Iraq. The Mujahideen might, but not al Qaeda. I don't see any reason to fear the unrealistic, and the Shi'ites will happily make crtain that al Qaeda goes bye-bye if we leave Iraq.

    I won't bother to quote from your last paragraph because I really do see where you're coming from and it won't change anything anyway. Patreaus and his command are now saying that they won't be able to report on progress until November or maybe December. A few more Friedmans and we'll see. As I've already clarified, this discussion has been worth it, if only that you've acknowledged there's more to the 'librul' mind than Kumbaya. But nothing will change in the way we deal with Iraq as long as the Deciderator stays his course, and the American people be damned. If I could change your mind, nothing would change. If you could change my mind, nothing would change. We just have to live with debt. The Iraqis will have to live with the outcome. Our argument won't affect either one.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Peace, like occupied bases in the Muslim holy lands? Peace, like cruise missiles into Yemen? Peace, like warships cruising the coastlines of known hostile countries? Peace, like supplying Saddam with chemical weapons he used against Iran (and his own folks) supplying Israel with nukes? Peace, like indescriminate bombing over a Muslim country just to terrify a dictator (it wasn't Saddam's forces dying in the "no fly zones"). You and I got an all together 'difernt idear' of peace, Ryan.

    I am not going to bother to give the much needed context behind your above statements and I am going to ignore you insinuation that we caused this war, but I will give you a few quotes:

    “Islam isn’t in America to be equal to any other faiths, but to become dominant. The Koran … should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on earth.” – Omar Ahmad, founder of the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR).

    “Islam is advancing according to a steady plan, to the point that tens of thousands of Muslims have joined the American army and Islam is the second largest religion in America. America will be destroyed. But we must be patient.” Saudi Professor Nassar bin Suleiman al-Omar on al-Majd TV.
    source

    As long as that mindset persists it doesn’t matter how involved we are or aren’t in the Middle East. If we got completely out they would still come after us, because Islam is “the only accepted religion on earth”. I would much rather battle them on their dirt than ours and Iraq is the perfect flytrap.

    You also know that it doesn’t matter which party has the presidency we will always be involved in the Middle East, so your misplaced idea of leaving them alone will not come to fruition. So we might as well do all we can to end it now.

    No, Ryan. Peace is not simply the absence of fighting. War has brought us victory many times. What we did after the war brought peace.

    Good job at twisting a conservative saying in an attempt it fit you backwards logic. You do have a skill with words, but that doesn’t make you right. Leaving won’t bring peace either. In fact I think it will do the opposite. I think it will excite the EVIL enemy and make things worse. This is our fundamental disagreement. But we have gone around and around on that too much already. I do agree with the last half of your last paragraph (except the “people be damned part”) and will leave it at that.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Good Job Andy, you've come back with a vengence. What was that saying? What doesn't kill ya makes you stronger. Big Swede

    ReplyDelete
  15. A few last thoughts.

    Why should it when they have Afghanistan and Pakistan? No. You've given me no reason (despite the doomsday fantasies) to think that al Qaeda would take over in Iraq.

    Iraqi as already full of Al Qaeda, coincidently we are there also (unless you get your way) to kill them. I don’t have to explain why I think they would setup shop in Iraq if we left. You have to explain why you think they would voluntary leave after a liberal induced victory.

    I just hope your leaders in Washington can keep their rhetoric to a minimum. This recent quote confirms my worst fears. “He said there is a substantial risk that al-Qaida in Iraq, a mostly Iraqi Sunni extremist group, will try to launch a mass-casualty attack on one of the 29 small U.S. patrol bases south of Baghdad in hopes of influencing the political debate in Washington on ending the war.”
    Source

    What is said in Washington can actually get troops killed and embolden the enemy. If they had any sense they would keep their mouths shut or at least negotiate behind closed doors.

    I am done for now. Feel free to take the last word.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Last word or not, it appears you have a gift for selective reading, Ryan.

    From the very article you post:

    Lynch said that Iraqi security forces are not close to being ready to take over for the American troops. So if the extra troops that were brought in this year are to be sent home in coming months, the insurgents - both Sunni and Shiite extremist groups - will regain control, he said.

    So, if we pull out, the *Iraqis* will retake control? Uhhm, isn't that kinda what they're doing now? Or is this, exactly as I have been attempting to get across, the case of Iraqi civil war putting us in a position that we must kill them to save them? And funny, I thought we were all afeared of al Qaeda.

    I don’t have to explain why I think they would setup shop in Iraq if we left. You have to explain why you think they would voluntary leave after a liberal induced victory.

    Actually, yes you do, Ryan, especially considering that you're backtracking on what you wrote, and completely misrepresenting what I wrote. You said that al Qaeda would "take over" if we pulled out. That's what I asked you to show. It's ridiculous to claim that they would "set up shop" when they already have, and we both agree on that.

    Finally, you inserted the word "voluntary" in what I've written, when I've never said anything of the kind. As I've written over and over, if we leave, they will too, but it will be a far cry from voluntary. It will most likely be at the hands of the Mujahideen and very bloody. I have a hard time feeling sorry for them, as I'm certain you do as well.

    ReplyDelete