Initial agreement reached on withdrawal of US troops from Iraq
Middle East News
Aug 4, 2008, 9:04 GMT
Older Talkback
page: 1 2
Eventually, we will pullout of Iraq. Cheers and see ya!
(The entire point of the surge was to allow time for the Iraqi Government to govern; as well as to give them more time to build their own army to insure that the country could stand by itself. Now that major oil revenues are coming in, it appears that they have even more to fight over amongst themselves. This has been a colossal waste ot effort, money and lives. We deal with far worse people than Saddam on a regular basis, and removing Saddam has empowered Iran to a place where we have little leverage, aside from threatening them; at which point they threaten us in return. Bush wasted 7 years NOT seeking a solution to the Palestine problem, the key to peace in the Mideast, which every recent President who preceded him had worked on).
www.nytimes.com/2008/08/04/opinion/04mon2.html?th&emc=th
Since the American invasion of Iraq in 2003, the oil-rich northern city of Kirkuk has been a political tinderbox-in-waiting that was largely ignored as war-fighting took precedence. Now that violence is way down, Iraqi leaders have no excuse not to peacefully decide the city’s future. Their failure to do so has already raised tensions and could further shred Iraq’s fragile social fabric — and unleash more bloodshed.
If the Kurds continue to hold the election law hostage, provincial elections now expected in early 2009 will also be stymied. These elections are crucial to Iraq’s political stability and reconciliation efforts because they will give minority Sunni Arabs a chance to be in government for the first time since they boycotted the 2005 elections. Sunnis who played a key role fighting with American forces against Iraqi insurgents are already embittered by the failure of Iraq’s Shiite-dominated government to hire enough of them for promised security jobs.
Compromises on Kirkuk are theoretically possible, but only the U.N. seems to be seriously trying to find one. That’s baffling, since no one, other than the Iraqis, has more vested in keeping the lid on violence and on tension with Turkey and Iran than the United States.
Iran is finally able to work towards the hegemony that they've always sought, along with the other Shia-led countries, upsetting the Sunni nations who supply us oil.
We are sending billions and billions of dollars annually to oil-producing countries for oil; and instead of spending 8 years improving alternate energy sources, we now pay a multiple of the oil price of 2000, bleeding the U.S. economy.
The housing market is getting worse, as even mortgages above sub-prime are costing homeowners more and more, along with energy costs - we will see many more foreclosures, and a weaking of banks' financials along with it. Business is finding it difficult to borrow to fund expansion.
We have lost standing all around the world, and will find it increasingly difficult to get other countries to stand with us in future wars. That popularity Obama was seen to have in Germany is really a reflection of their disgust with Bush, and his policies.
We are likely past the point where global warming can be dealt with, as the cost of doing so has risen. People affected by Katrina are still losing their temporary housing, years later, with no long-term solution.
The lies and fear-mongering continue, with even McCain walking away from his own position AGAINST offshore drilling. Over 80 percent of offshore leases already granted are seeing no drilling activity; so Bush wants to give the oil companies MORE places NOT to drill, in a giveaway of U.S.-owned mineral resources.
We have moved from a book-surplus left by Clinton to a masssive expansion of the National Debt, with no end in sight to annual deficits.
None of what the psycho-babbling libnazia above say is right, and saying so doesn't make me wrong.
'The entire point of the surge was to allow time for the Iraqi Government to govern; as well as to give them more time to build their own army to insure that the country could stand by itself. '
And it has. And you opposed it.
'it appears that they have even more to fight over amongst themselves.'
Gee, what a tragedy...prosperity.
'h wasted 7 years NOT seeking a solution to the Palestine problem, '
There is no solution until they evolve.
'the key to peace in the Mideast, which every recent President who preceded him had worked on'
Well then, I guess that means that there is peace in the middle east. Oh wait... By the way, the Bush administration HAS worked for a solution to the 'palestinian' problem. Saying they haven't is another one of your lies.
'Now that violence is way down, Iraqi leaders have no excuse not to peacefully decide the city’s future. '
Gee, violence way down.. Iraqis solving problems politically.. Guess that means you were wrong you moron.
'Iran is finally able to work towards the hegemony that they've always sought, '
Iran has been doing that for the past 2500+ years. Is that Bush's fault?
'We are sending billions and billions of dollars annually to oil-producing countries for oil;'
Because the defeat-o-crats wont let us drill. Pelosi wont even allow debate. Bush wanted to lift the domestic production moratorium but the democrats filibustered it twice.
'The housing market is getting worse,'
You are just tossing out crap to see what sticks...
Bottom line, had we listened to you, you islamst apologist defeatist idiot, we would have been thrown out of Iraq and defeated, which is exactly what you wanted. Drop dead.
'We have lost standing all around the world, '
Bull. You don't speak for the world, you are an idiot.
'That popularity Obama was seen to have in Germany is really a reflection of their disgust with Bush, and his policies.'
They like Obama because they know he will sign US sovereignty over to internationalist organizations like the EU and the UN, effectively giving the miserable Europeans a measure of control over American actions. No thanks. They like Obama because he is a socialist as well. Socialism doesn't work.
I am not needy enough to vote for someone who is unqualified to be president in order to be 'liked'. I would rather have someone who is more qualified then a jr senator who decided he was ready to be president after 143 days in the senate. If that annoys the europeans all the better.
'We are likely past the point where global warming can be dealt with,'
Lions and tigers and bears, you had better drink hemlock.
'The lies and fear-mongering continue, with even McCain walking away from his own position AGAINST offshore drilling. '
Obbama is now flip flopping on it as well... As well as EVERYTHING ELSE UNDER THE SUN. Obama is simply a liar.
'We have moved from a book-surplus left by Clinton to a masssive[sic] expansion of the National Debt, '
So we shouldn't be creating GIGANTIC entitlement programs like the ones Obama proposes now should we?
You sound unhappy here. Perhaps you should get out.
Strange article.....2011?? I suppose that the DEVIL is in the DETAILS as usual.........BUT this 2011 doesn't 'Ring True'......How are Exxon Mobil & the rest of the NeoCartel GONNA get ALL the OIL in TWO years?? Its NOT possible....So....Look for the HIDDEN Tripwires: 'except to Protect' AND 'Assistance, If requested by the President, Prime minister or the cabinet Minister with the responsibility of oil' Or Maybe 'Provided all parties fulfill their commitments as delineated in Subsection 3, Paragraph 1. through 11.' Its still gotta get approved..... Far, far..FAR.... 2 go .. .B4 itz A 'DONE DEAL' TGW Martha's Vineyard
LOL!:
''Iraqi law makers Monday reached an agreement to temporarily divide control of Kirkuk [GlobalSecurity backgrounder] among the city's ethnic groups, as part of a compromise bill providing for provincial elections in the city. Control of Kirkuk has been major point of contention, with Kurdish members of the country's parliament [official website, in Arabic] demanding a referendum allowing city residents to decide whether or not to join the semi-autonomous Kurdistan region of Iraq. Kirkuk Turkmen and Arabs had opposed the referendum [VOI report] for fear of eviction should the city become part of the region, and instead had supported long-term proportional representation among the groups. A vote on the elections bill was originally planned to take place on Sunday, but is now scheduled for Tuesday...''
Do me a favor and predict that I wont win the lottery this week.
This post is in response to the nonsense spewed from the post entitled “Do You Ever Tire of Being Dead Wrong”.
You hypocritical pretentious pinhead! You accuse others of lies as you parrot talking points pulled from the proverbial rectum of Fox news. Lets go through them one at a time.
First, the surge has been a success, and now the country can “stand” on its own.
Don’t bring that crap around here you ignorant flag waver. There will come a day when the US will leave Iraq. Whether it is two years from now, or ten years from now we are going to leave and there will be blood. Furthermore, those that come to power after we are gone are not going to be our friends. They will be the friends of Iran and enemies of Israel. Great, instead of loosing ten soldiers a week, we are loosing about two. Woo Hoo! Break out the flags… SUCCESS!! Hey numb-nuts, how about none. How about supporting our troops, bringing them home and getting them the hell out of this no win situation? You are a confused moron!
Second, there is no “solution” to the Israeli/Palestinian conflict.
This statement really demonstrates how little you know. The solution to this problem lies in justice and adherence to international law. By giving Israel billions of dollars a year, the US enables Israel to continue the illegal nearly 40 year occupation. It also gives the US leverage to force Israel to treat there neighbors with justice. George Bush instead gave them a blank check to continue there immoral policies.
Thirdly, you would have us all believe (as you apparently do) that we can work our way out of this energy crisis through domestic drilling.
I don’t know what to tell you about this except to check your facts. You are once again dead wrong. The truth is that even if we opened up all nature reserves in the US to oil drilling, it wouldn’t affect the global market for at least 10 years (probably closer to 20) and even then, it would affect prices by less than $0.25 a gallon.
Lastly, let me just list some of your nonsense that doesn’t deserve a response.
Obama is a “socialist” and Germans only like him because they believe that he will give Germans “control” of America’s “actions”
All this crap you spew without even addressing the thesis statement that the Iraq war “has been a colossal waste of effort, money and lives. We deal with far worse people than Saddam on a regular basis, and removing Saddam has empowered Iran to a place where we have little leverage.”
Rememeber, you can teach a monkey to wave a flag but that doesn’t make him patriotic.
Of course USA will continue to plant bombs
and blame 'al qaeda' for it,saying;see we can not
leave! this is what has been going on since
2003.Why to control the oil,so they can blackmail the chinese
and the rest of the world. Iran,you are next....
We must first forgive one another.
'Don’t bring that crap around here you ignorant flag waver.'
Gee, that's not really a rebuttal. Not really grounded in any evidence or even reality. Just a tantrum from little bee-atch.
'. There will come a day when the US will leave Iraq. '
Indeed, and thanks to the surge and the counterinsurgency tactics it will be on our terms, not theirs.
'Whether it is two years from now, or ten years from now we are going to leave and there will be blood. Furthermore, those that come to power after we are gone are not going to be our friends.'
And you can foresee this because you have a crystal ball. The situation requires managing and will for some time. If we abandon it then the worst case scenario that you describe might come to pass. If we so abandon it though, blame will be pinned on those who insist on abandoning it for the bloodshed (Read Obama/the democrats) because as of now, it is safer to be an Iraqi in Iraq then it is to be an American in Detroit, St.Louis or Chicago.
'They will be the friends of Iran and enemies of Israel'
As opposed to the friends of the USA and Israel that they were before.
'Second, there is no “solution” to the Israeli/Palestinian conflict.'
Not the full quote. There will be no solution until the 'palestinians' accept the right to exist, something that Hamas hasn't/ will not do.
'he solution to this problem lies in justice and adherence to international law. '
So it's international law that they can launch attacks, launch rockets, kidnap, murder and suicide bomb Israel? You have a convenient way at looking at 'international law'. Perhaps you shouldn't lecture about things you have no idea about.
'By giving Israel billions of dollars a year, the US enables Israel to continue the illegal nearly 40 year occupation.'
Who says it's 'illegal'? Is Gaza being occupied. No? So what is their excuse for the mess they have made this time? (It's always someone else's fault...)
' It also gives the US leverage to force Israel to treat there neighbors with justice.'
It is in Hamas's charter to drive the Jews in to the sea. They do not recognize Israels right to exist. You idiot.
'George Bush instead gave them a blank check to continue there immoral policies.'
It's not immoral to defend yourself from someone who is committed to your destruction.
'Thirdly, you would have us all believe (as you apparently do) that we can work our way out of this energy crisis through domestic drilling.'
It is a part of the solution and should have been done for decades.
'The truth is that even if we opened up all nature reserves in the US to oil drilling, it wouldn’t affect the global market for at least 10 years'
According to whom? The DNC? It would have an immediate effect on oil speculators who are betting on the US congress doing nothing. Regardless, If we don't drill now, in 10 years when gas is $20 a gallon there would be some illiterate snot like you repeating what it was told that we can't drill because it wouldn't have an 'immediate' effect. This is something we should have been doing all along and haven't been because of the democrats. That is provable.
'and even then, it would affect prices by less than $0.25 a gallon.'
That's billions of dollars not being shipped to foreign countries. Seeing as you ride the special ed bust to your grade school, you have no concept of saving 20 cents a gallon but combine that with other measures and it would bring the price down much further.
'Lastly, let me just list some of your nonsense that doesn’t deserve a response.'
If it doesn't deserve a response then shut up.
'All this crap you spew without even addressing the thesis statement that the Iraq war '
It's a different thesis statement, obviously. One that you couldn't refute.
' We deal with far worse people than Saddam on a regular basis,'
Who? Who do we deal with that is worse then saddam was?
' and removing Saddam has empowered Iran to a place where we have little leverage.”'
We didn't have any leverage before. We need to get leverage over the people who have leverage over Iran if we want to exert leverage. Either that or watch Israel bomb their nuclear facilities.
'Rememeber[sic], you can teach a monkey to wave a flag but that doesn’t make him patriotic.'
Well, if I had enough time and enough bananas I might give it a try with you. Someone had some success in teaching a monkey named nate how to hysterically regurgitate the moveon.org talking points without giving the slightest thought to what you were actually saying.
First, I would just like to thank you for responding to me and giving me the opportunity to reason with you.
Secondly, I must confess that name calling is not my thing, I was just trying to get through to you on your own level.
Now, I think I have a pretty good idea about what’s going on. You are a victim of propaganda and the mainstream media, and you have not arrived at your beliefs through an honest search for truth. You have instead tacitly accepted what has been repeated ad-nauseam by your favorite news sites because it appeals to you on an emotional level. You know, it makes you feel good. The message is a simple one: US/Republican good, not US/Republican not as good and quite possibly bad.
Honest truth seekers research and objectively evaluate both sides of an issue. It is clear to me that either you haven’t even heard both sides to most issues or you are not an honest truth seeker and simply a propagandist.
So let’s take it from the top. Question: Why did GWB invade Iraq? You can pull any of the many hollow rationales offered by administration apologists and my reply will be the same. It was not out of fear of an Iraqi attack. It was not out of revenge because Saddam knocked down the twin towers. It was not because we are altruistic and wanted to sacrifice our blood and treasure so the Iraqi’s could be “free”. These rationales were misleading and their sole intention was to generate public support for the war. If for instance, GWB had said that the US will be in a much better economic position once we monopolize Iraq’s vast strategic oil reserves or Israel will have a much easier time ethnically cleansing the West Bank once Saddam is gone, GWB would not have generated the support for the war that he needed.
So here we are, seven years into a disastrous unwinnable war that will end up costing the US trillions (1,000,000,000,000’s) of dollars and a million or so human lives (perhaps you are only concerned with the several thousand Americans who have died). I am thankful that the level of violence and deaths, both Iraqi and American, have gone down considerably but that doesn’t change how things will turn out. We are refereeing a civil war where at least three factions have opposing interests. I don’t need a crystal ball to know that any democratic government in Iraq that is by the people and for the people will not be an ally of the US or Israel but will be an ally of Iran. Why? Because that is how a majority of Iraqi’s feel. Are you so naive to believe that we have, can, or will win the hearts and minds of the Iraqi’s? Please, give them some credit. Will they gladly hand over their oil wells to chevron and shell? Will they gladly receive Bibby Netanyahu Israel’s next PM and allow him the use of Iraqi airspace for Israeli jets to bomb Iran? Perhaps Israel will be allowed to place tanks in Al Kut or Al Amarah in preparation of an Iranian land invasion if only we take more “time” to properly “manage” the situation. To deny the inevitability of an anti us/Israeli and pro Iranian Iraqi government is preposterous. And if you concede this point, then what exactly was the purpose of the trillions of dollars spent and million lives lost?
Next, we turn to Palestine where you pull out the red herring of the Hamas Charter and by so doing once again leave yourself only two options, parrot or propagandist. Assuming you are a parrot, I don’t have time to educate you on all aspects of the Geneva Conventions, the UN Charter, international law, and facts and the historical record as they pertain to the Israeli Palestinian conflict. I can recommend some books though such as Peace Not Appartheid by Jimmy Carter, or Zionism the Real Enemy of the Jews by Alan Hart. These books should point you in the right direction. Remember, honest truth-seekers will objectively evaluate all sides of an issue and I encourage you to take that step.
Your stated belief is that the Hamas Charter of 1988 and Hamas’ refusal to “recognize” Israel is a primary cause of the continuation of the conflict. Let me give you several reasons why it is not. First, the conflict was going on for nearly four decades before the Hamas Charter was written, so it makes no since to blame this document. An honest truth seeker would look elsewhere for blame. Secondly, since Israel has never defined its own borders (Gee that ought to tell you something) on exactly what borders is Israel supposed to be recognized? The 1948 UN partition plan? The 1967 cease-fire agreement? You may want to give this some thought. Also, Hamas has explicitly endorsed a generation long truce and unspecified future political arrangements that will be the outcome of negotiations. I am not surprised if you are unaware of this fact as it doesn’t jive with the false narrative the mainstream media tries to sell. Don’t feel bad, I was a victim of MSM propaganda for over 20 years of my life too but then I decided to research and evaluate both sides of the issue for myself.
The Arab league and the Palestinians have both for years now offered full recognition and normalized relations with Israel if they simply withdraw to the 1967 borders. That means that the Palestinians are willing to settle for just 22% of what was originally all theirs. Israel continues to reject this offer because they want more land and do not want peace if it means that they have to settle for anything less than “Greater Israel”. Furthermore, Israel is a signatory of the Geneva Conventions and article 49 of that document states'...The Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population in the territory it occupies.' That is however exactly what Israel has been doing with its settlements in the west bank for several decades now. Once again, I encourage you to spend some time learning about what is really going on in the mid east. If you are only a misinformed Parrot and not a propagandist, it will change your mind.
One of your questions to me was who do we deal with that is worse then Saddam was. Again, I appreciate your apparent willingness to learn. The US has historically negotiated with tyrants, allied with tyrants, and installed tyrants as puppets (even to replace popular democratically elected leaders) repeatedly over the last half of the 20th century. Here is a link to a more comprehensive list than I have time for thirdworldtraveler.com/US_ThirdWorld/dictators.html . Oh, and here is an article entitled “America’s Terrorist Ally Uzbekistan’s Dictator Makes Saddam Look Good” found at commondreams.org/views05/0525-28.htm . The last point I want to make on this topic however is this. While Saddam was doing the most wicked evil things that we later condemned him for, he was our friend. While he was using WMD against his own people, we supported him. Hell, the precursors for many of his chemical and biological weapons were sold to him from US firms and Rumsfeld met and shook hands with Saddam just to tell him to keep up the good work.
As stated last time, I think it would be wrong to open up environmental reserves to the exploitation of big oil. I don’t believe that the American people would benefit one iota from such a move unless they happened to be an oil investor or exec. You speculate that it would have an immediate effect on the oil market and lower prices at the pump. Again, I think you are being victimized by the propaganda of big oil—the same people that helped kill the electric car that was first produced in 1993. Please educate yourself and watch the documentary “Who Killed the Electric Car”.
I like bananas but too many and I get the trots…
'I must confess that name calling is not my thing, I was just trying to get through to you on your own level.'
Well name calling IS my thing and you are showing yourself to be an idiot.
'You are a victim of propaganda and the mainstream media, and you have not arrived at your beliefs through an honest search for truth.'
Well then, it should be a breeze for you to disprove all of my erroneous beliefs then.... What do we want to bet that you attempt to do so by tossing out propaganda and falsehoods?
'It is clear to me that either you haven’t even heard both sides to most issues or you are not an honest truth seeker and simply a propagandist.'
It's clear to me that you are an adolescent pompous ass.
'If for instance, GWB had said that the US will be in a much better economic position once we monopolize Iraq’s vast strategic oil reserves or Israel will have a much easier time ethnically cleansing the West Bank once Saddam is gone '
Where has he said those things? I looked for where he said that 'the US will be in a much better economic position once we monopolize Iraq’s vast strategic oil reserves' as you have stated that he had.. Couldn't find that. I also looked for where he stated: 'Israel will have a much easier time ethnically cleansing the West Bank once Saddam is gone'... I guess you are just making up facts to fit your prejudices.
Look at Iraq on a map off the middle east. It is in the center of it. We had war declared on us by islamist terrorists who's stated objective was to have a world wide caliphate. Where better to give them a place to go to get killed then the center of the middle east? Bin laden himself called Iraq the most important front in his war against the infidel. That is why we went to Iraq, to have a lighting rod for the jihadies who wanted to die. One that was not on American soil.
'So here we are, seven years into a disastrous unwinnable...'
Seems that the un-winnable war is showing some serious progress.
'that will end up costing the US trillions (1,000,000,000,000’s) of dollars '
If you are going to make up figures why not go for the gusto and say basillions of dollars?
'and a million or so human lives'
Again, if you are going to make up numbers why not really go for it? A googolplex of human lives? That sounds worse but is just as accurate...
'I am thankful that the level of violence and deaths'
I doubt it, you would have loved to see us fail at this so you could have hung it on Bush/the USA. I have seen people like you openly rooting for more Americans to die here.
' We are refereeing a civil war where at least three factions have opposing interests.'
Even the leftist media doesn't call it a civil war anymore.
'I don’t need a crystal ball to know that any democratic government in Iraq that is by the people and for the people will not be an ally of the US or Israel but will be an ally of Iran.'
Was it an ally of the USA before? Israel? No. At this point they will not be a THREAT to either. And yes, Iraq will be closer to the USA then it was before.
'Will they gladly hand over their oil wells to chevron and shell? '
Neither of those are American companies.. And they will gladly lease their oil fields and make big money off of them like every other country with oil does.
'Will they gladly receive Bibby Netanyahu Israel’s next PM'
Nope, but that doesn't mean our objectives wont have been achieved.
' and allow him the use of Iraqi airspace for Israeli jets to bomb Iran? '
The Israelis don't need Iraqi airspace.
'To deny the inevitability of an anti us/Israeli and pro Iranian Iraqi government is preposterous.'
Their USA and Israel are 2 different countries. The USA has influence in the Middle East with countries that are hostile to Israel Iraq will be similar. Additionally, there are degrees of 'Pro-iranian'. The Kurds in the north don't like the iranians because the iranians have behaved like vial scum towards them. The Sunnis in the west hate the Iranians with a passion. Even the shiites in the east are sick of the iranians meddling in everything. So no. The scenario that you hope for doesn't have to play out the way you say it will. It wont if we continue to exert our influence until the Iraqi government sorts itself out.
'then what exactly was the purpose of the trillions of dollars spent and million lives lost?'
To break al Qaeda in it's own back yard.
'Next,'
Lecturing child.
'where you pull out the red herring of the Hamas Charter'
They are committed to Israels destruction. They indoctrinate their children with cartoons on murdering isralies from day 1. They have stated that they don't care if they live like animals as long as the isralies suffer.
'once again leave yourself only two options, parrot or propagandist.'
So is what I said not true? You can't address that can you... What I said is the fact and your PROPAGANDA by the likes of Alan Hart pretty much lays rest to your 'not arrived at your beliefs through an honest search for truth' hypocrisy.
'Your stated belief is that the Hamas Charter of 1988 and Hamas’ refusal to “recognize” Israel is a primary cause of the continuation of the conflict. '
It is one aspect of it.
'First, the conflict was going on for nearly four decades before the Hamas Charter was written'
Well, wrong, but even if that were so it wouldn't change the fact that palestinians have elected an organization that is specifically dedicated to the destruction of it's neighbor and who acts on that daily.
' so it makes no since to blame this document. '
I don't blame the document. I blame the people who have adopted it as their charter.
' An honest truth seeker would look elsewhere for blame. '
An honest truth seeker wouldn't believe like an infant does: that it is always someone else's fault. You have set up the Israelis as your scapegoat, you have read the propaganda that confirms your prejudices and you have the laughable audacity to regard yourself as a 'truth seeker'? LOL.
'Secondly, since Israel has never defined its own borders (Gee that ought to tell you something) on exactly what borders is Israel supposed to be recognized? '
They haven't because there is no one to negotiate with. Even now it is Hamas on one side and Gaza on the other.
'The 1967 cease-fire agreement? You may want to give this some thought.'
My thought is, that if they won it in the 6 day war where the Arabs ganged up on them and still got their asses kicked then it is theirs. Anything they give back is a gift to murderous thugs who have proven themselves completely unworthy.
'Also, Hamas has explicitly endorsed a generation long truce '
Hasn't stopped the rockets. Or the kidnappings. Or the murder. Hamas are liars.
' Don’t feel bad,'
I feel fine, You haven't persuaded with your selective propaganda though. Are the Israelis 'occupying' Gaza? No? Is it at peace and prospering?
'The Arab league and the Palestinians have both for years now offered full recognition and normalized relations with Israel if they simply withdraw to the 1967 borders.'
Gee, mighty nice of them. firstly, they have violated just about every agreement that they have ever endorsed. (look at Lebanon) Secondly, Hizbullah isn't a part of the Arab league. Thirdly Israel took this land from them in a war that they started and shouldn't have to give an inch back. Fourthly, 1967 was 41 years ago. Israel has managed to build the most free, cosmopolitan society in the middle east and when they turned over Gaza to the palestinians it was plunged in to the dark ages. (When they can't kill jews they start in on each other.) Lastly, Hamas has stated thatit will never surrender it's objective of 'driving the Jews in to the sea'....So the endorsement of this 'arab league' doesn't signify much to anyone who is a 'seeker of truth'.
'That means that the Palestinians are willing to settle for just 22% of what was originally all theirs'
These so called 'Palestinians' are mostly Jordanian and Egyptian Arabs. Once upon a time all of Israel once belonged to the Jews as well.
'Israel continues to reject this offer because they want more land and do not want peace'
They reject it because it has been demonstrated that appeasement won't bring peace. If the Arabs were happy with the pre '67 borders why were the Israelis constantly being attacked on them from 1948 to 1967?
'Furthermore, Israel is a signatory of the Geneva Conventions...'
Israel should just declare it's borders and be done with the farce.
'. Once again, I encourage you to spend some time learning about what is really going on in the mid east'
I have been there. I have seen the society that Israel built and the damage that these 'palestinians' have done to it because they are incapable of 'building' themselves.
'Again, I appreciate your apparent willingness to learn.'
Still waiting....
'he US has historically negotiated with tyrants,'
That was not, obviously the question. The question was 'Who do we deal with that is worse then saddam was?' It is in current tense. Who are we dealing with that has put 400,000 people in mass graves and started wars that killed about a million? No need to launch in to a sanctimonious lecture about things that you have been indoctrinated to believe, who are we currently dealing with that is as bad as saddam was?
'commondreams.org'
So much for avoiding propaganda.
'While Saddam was doing the most wicked evil things that we later condemned him for, he was our friend.'
No. We cut him off after he gassed the Kurds. He continued to be europes alli though.
' Hell, the precursors for many of his chemical and biological weapons were sold to him from US firms'
Wrong. They were from German, Indian and Dutch firms.
'Rumsfeld met and shook hands with Saddam just to tell him to keep up the good work.'
Not after he crossed the line of using poison gas on his own people.
'I think it would be wrong to open up environmental reserves to the exploitation of big oil.'
Well, you don't have to drive to work.
' I don’t believe that the American people would benefit one iota from such a move'
Don't let facts get in the way of your beliefs.
'You speculate that it would have an immediate effect on the oil market and lower prices at the pump'
I think it would end the speculation bubble which is what is driving prices up.
'Again, I think you are being victimized by the propaganda of big oil'
Again. you say these things without a coherent supporting argument.
'the same people that helped kill the electric car that was first produced in 1993.'
The electric car was killed by market forces, not nefarious plots.
' Please educate yourself'
I have several advanced degrees, you are confusing 'education' with 'indoctrination'. You certainly haven't impressed me with anything other then your ability to regurgitate the propaganda that you want to believe and yet compliment yourself for being open minded when you do..
'I like bananas but too many and I get the trots…'
Stop pouring it out on the internet then.
I feel pity for Nate,having done so much work to establish historical truth about the middle east conflict,only to be met with the usual ranting of brainwashed victims of propaganda .It almost hurts to read things like ;once upon a time Israel belonged to the jews...come on guys,that was 2000 years ago.Using that kind of argument ,all americans must now pack and go back to the countries their ancestors originated from .Unless you are a native indian of course .Another fine argument from the simpleton brigade is this one:Israel never defined it's borders because they have nobody to talk to ...That is the apex of absurdity of course,is there anything preventing them from doing that ?
Palestine was perhaps not a nation,it was part of the ottoman empire till the end of WW1; british mandate afterwards.Nevertheless the country belnged to the people that lived there but where driven of their lands in 1948 by force and terror,google Deir Yassin and see what you find .Palestinians are now living in refugee camps in Syria,Jordan,Lebanon and still want to retun to their homelands.Why shouldn't they have that right,you give the jewish people that right after 2000 years,so why not them.
' usual ranting of brainwashed victims of propaganda'
From a like minded idiot who has been brainwashed by propaganda.
'It almost hurts to read things like ;once upon a time Israel belonged to the jews.'
Why 'almost'? What can I do to push it all the way? It is true by the way.
'come on guys,that was 2000 years ago'
And 1948 was 60 years ago. That doesn't stop the 'palestinians' from their terrorism.
'.Using that kind of argument ,all americans must now pack and go back to the countries their ancestors originated from .'
Not at all. Same with the Israelis. See?
'nother fine argument from the simpleton brigade is this one:Israel never defined it's borders because they have nobody to talk to'
Seeing as hamas is now slaughtering Fata...
'Palestine was perhaps not a nation'
Gee, perhaps not.
'.Nevertheless the country belnged to the people that lived there but where driven of their lands in 1948 by force and terror'
No. The ones who stayed are the freest Arabs in the middle east, the ones who left to wage war on Israel lost out.
'Palestinians are now living in refugee camps in Syria,Jordan,Lebanon'
Again, 1948 was 60 years ago. Anyone still in a refugee camp after 60 years has to be pretty pathetic.
'and still want to retun to their homelands'
They are already there.
Well Buddy,
You quote me accurately but you apparently had difficulty understanding my point. I will try and break it down for you. I wrote in my last post “…if for instance, [notice the if] GWB had said that the US will be in a much better economic position once we monopolize Iraq’s vast strategic oil reserves or Israel will have a much easier time ethnically cleansing the West Bank once Saddam is gone”. Notice that I said “if”. You see, I am not suggesting that GWB said this; I am suggesting that this was his UNSTATED motivation as all of his hollow stated motivations turned out to be untrue. Therefore it comes as no surprise that you found no record of those statements. I hope that clears it up for you.
You Said “Look at Iraq on a map off the middle east. It is in the center of it. We had war declared on us by islamist terrorists who's stated objective was to have a world wide caliphate. Where better to give them a place to go to get killed then the center of the middle east? Bin laden himself called Iraq the most important front in his war against the infidel. That is why we went to Iraq, to have a lighting rod for the jihadies who wanted to die. One that was not on American soil.”
Let me restate the above paragraph in my own words to make sure I am following your logic correctly. Point one: Islamic terrorists hell-bent on taking over the world declared war on us and attacked us. Point 2: Islamic terrorists are in the mid east so we decided to attack a sovereign nation in the middle of the mid east because of its ideal geographic location, hoping it would act as a lightning rod. Point three: The plan worked like a charm, the leader of the terrorists took the bait and we subsequently broke their backs.
Question: If you believe that the previous paragraph explains why we went to war in Iraq, why didn’t GWB just say that? Why did he have to lie about WMD and ties to al qaeda? Why did GWB suppress intelligence that suggested all Saddam’s WMD had been destroyed or that Saddam had no ties with al Qaeda?
You believe this unwinnable war is showing some “serious progress”. Well, in the seven years that we have been at war, the Bush administration has asserted that we have turned the corner so many times that we’ve made a square two times over. I admire your optimism but I think it springs from ignorance.
You accuse me of “tossing out propaganda and falsehoods” namely how much the Iraq war will cost US taxpayers and how many lives it will have cost. Well, who are readers to believe, you, me, or a nobel prize winning economist? I’m sure that you still agree with Cheyne and trust that oil revenues will pay for all of it right? I however will trust the calculations of the nobel prize winning economist which you can read here guardian.co.uk/world/2006/jan/07/usa.iraq .
Why are we even quibbling over numbers? I presume you would argue that even if the war does cost trillions, it would have been worth it. How much do you think it will have cost us? Half that? A quarter of that? If I can prove to you that it has cost a trillion would you concede that the war wasn’t worth it? I think not. So the issue is superfluous.
The same is true of the total number of deaths. I believe the accurate number is close to 1 million and I can point to studies that support this number wikipedia.org/wiki/ORB_survey_of_casualties_of_the_Iraq_War . What do you think the number is? If I could prove to you that 1 million lives were lost as a result of the war, would you concede that it was too high of a price to pay? Of course not, you would rationalize it right away. But, for the record, these are not falsehoods pulled out of my ass like Cheyne’s “the reconstruction will pay for itself” or “the war will only last a few months.” They are scientific studies who's methods can be scrutinized and evaluated and reproduced.
You live in a confused twisted world where you “doubt” that I am thankful that the level of violence is down. Then you say “I have seen people like you openly routing for more Americans to die.” I call Bullshit. Who are people like me and how come I haven’t seen anyone in the states hoping that US soldiers die. I got out of the Army in 2002 but I have good friends in Iraq (you know, people like me) who, I can promise you, are not hoping to die. People like me don’t like to see lives wasted for no reason. It is the ignorant like yourself who don’t care to count the human cost of foolish misadventures like this one. It’s all just entertainment to brain dead hypnotized flag wavers like yourself.
Chevron is a US oil corporation headquartered in California and Shell is Dutch. The Iraqi’s are not gladly going to leasing their oil fields to these corporations and neither do many other countries like Venezuela and Iran. You see some countries believe that there natural resource wealth should be used to enrich the lives of all its citizens and not just the corrupt government and oil companies. That is why Chavez kicked out Exxon and Conoco Phillips and why Iran kicked out BP.
Moving on, you continue to pull red herrings out of your ass to obfuscate from the obvious cause and solution to the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. Now, it is not only the Hamas Charter that is causing the perpetuation of the conflict, it is the cartoons that are shown on state tv. These things are not seen as a symptom of the illegal, brutal, 40 year occupation, but the cause of it. ROTFLMFAO
Yes I have read quite extensively on the subject. And the historical record is clear. Just because you don’t like what authors like Morris, Carter, Hart, and Chomsky say about the historical record doesn’t make it any less a fact. You are entitled to your own opinions but facts are facts. The settlements are illegal under international law. The occupation is illegal under international law. Just because you in your infinite wisdom believe that Israel should be able to keep all the territory it conquered in the 67 war it started doesn’t make it so.
Do me a favor and recommend a book to me that most closely mirrors your personal views on the causes for the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. I am eager to evaluate their arguments and compare them with that of the other side. You seem really quick to dismiss Hart and Carter as Propagandists. Have you read their books? I am dead certain the answer is no. How about Benny Morris, have you read his book? It tells the same story. How can an honest truth seeker label a book as propaganda before even reading it? So please, recommend to me a good book on the subject and I promise I will read it.
Help me out Buddy,
Unindoctrinate me. Point me in the direction of real learning. I thought I knew what up was but apparently I was mistaken. I read books that were not written in good faith, books that were intended to support my preexisting ignorant prejudices. I confess and relent. Now, please, I beg you point me in the right direction. Give me a name or book title that will set me on the path. That’s all I ask, the more help you can give me the better, but I will settle for just a name. Who is it that most opened your eyes to the ways of the world and the benevolent nature of US foreign policy? Who can I read that will fully explain the depravity and wickedness of Muslim/Palestinian/Arab society. Seriously, please…
after reading these comments it is clear that the neoconanderthal presents the premise that the reason that Iraq was attacked was to turn that place into a scapegoat nation after the 9/11 attacks on the United States. That is, even though Iraq had no connection to the 9/11 terrorist operation, like some other nations did, such as Afghanistan, and Pakistan, which hosted terrorist bases, the United States deliberately chose to destroy Iraq, and turn it into a vast 'terrorist magnet and killing field' simply because Iraq was in the middle of the middle east. Such an asinine, depraved strategy, chosen as a way to try to win the war on terror, is a stark reminder to the world that war criminals can wave the flag of any nation as they try to justify their own atrocities.
“Notice that I said “if”. You see, I am not suggesting that GWB said this; I am suggesting that this was his UNSTATED motivation as all of his hollow stated motivations turned out to be untrue.”
Aaah, so we are mind reading. The fact is we invaded knowing it would raise the price of oil and Israel could “ethnically cleanse” the west bank in about 10 days…2 weeks tops if it wanted to. With or without Saddam. So no, your point doesn’t hold.
“Point one: Islamic terrorists hell-bent on taking over the world declared war on us and attacked us”
Oversimplified but we can go with this for now.
“Point 2: Islamic terrorists are in the mid east so we decided to attack a sovereign nation in the middle of the mid east because of its ideal geographic location, hoping it would act as a lightning rod.”
That is only one of the reasons that we got rid of saddam, but it was A reason.
“Point three: The plan worked like a charm,”
Well no, winning the peace should have been as well planed for as the invasion was.
“If you believe that the previous paragraph explains why we went to war in Iraq, why didn’t GWB just say that?”
Because 1) it isn’t the entire reason. 2) it implies imperial motivations that are not there. (The idea is based on Mackinder's Heartland theory which was from a time where it was socially acceptable for countries to build and maintain empires. In this instance an empire is something where a country can reasonably expect to take more out of the countries that it is occupying then it puts in and that just wasn’t a reasonable expectation for Iraq.)
“Why did he have to lie about WMD and ties to al qaeda?”
He didn’t. We believed that there were WMD in Iraq. Arguably there were, however the British, French, Russians, Italians, Israelis, Chinese, Jordanians and Saudis were all saying that Saddam had WMD’s. Indeed the tons of yellowcake uranium that were delivered to Canada from Iraq were cause enough for concern. Links to al Qaeda? Were we fighting al Qaeda in Iraq? (see the whole “lightening rod hypothesis”)
“Why did GWB suppress intelligence that suggested all Saddam’s WMD had been destroyed or that Saddam had no ties with al Qaeda?”
Which intelligence?
“You believe this unwinnable war is showing some “serious progress”.”
Yes. You believe that it is “un winnable.”
“Well, in the seven years that we have been at war, the Bush administration has asserted that we have turned the corner so many times that we’ve made a square two times over.”
Look at the casualty figures. Look at the political benchmarks. Look at the measure of Iraqi optimism. Indeed, by almost any metric there has been great progress in defeating the insurgency since we have actually started using counterinsurgency tactics. It may have been “unfair” to have the battle between islamists and humanity in Iraq’s back yard but hopefully they will get a free, democratic and prosperous country out of it. They are getting to the point where that will be their choice.
“I admire your optimism but I think it springs from ignorance.”
So the statement that the war is “unwinnable” (our objectives can not be achieved) is “informed”…. Bull. At this juncture the only way to “lose” it would be to throw it all away.
“You accuse me of “tossing out propaganda and falsehoods” namely how much the Iraq war will cost US taxpayers and how many lives it will have cost.”
Not only that.
“Well, who are readers to believe, you, me, or a nobel[sic] prize winning economist?”
Writing in the Guardian? Joseph Stiglitzs’ worst case scenario predictions have already been shown to be wrong and that article is only a few months old. Joseph Stiglitz was also being paid to come up with these “figures “ by George Soros who has lavishly funded efforts to link the economy and the war in order to promote the democrats. (most of whom voted to invade Iraq) So no, this and the lancet study with the trillions of “extra” Iraqi deaths are political, not scientific. They are pushing an agenda which is Americas defeat and loss of sovereignty.
Yes, you are quoting propaganda that has an obvious agenda and lecturing that you have the truth and anyone who doesn’t believe it is ignorant. You sound like a real douche bag Nate.
“Why are we even quibbling over numbers?”
Because it demonstrates that you have sought out conformation of what you have wanted to believe rather then any objective truth. You can always find conformation of your prejudices in sources that tell you what you want to hear.
“I presume you would argue that even if the war does cost trillions, it would have been worth it.”
Before the war started I added my name to a list of former officers in the US navy and US marines that went to several senators and members of the defense department stating that the only thing worse then starting a war in Iraq would be to start one and not finish it. The letter stated that this conflict could outlast our national attention span and cost more in money and lives then was being budgeted for.
Well Congress voted for it anyway which means that the American people chose to do this. Once we started we needed to finish it on our terms because not defeating the islamists would have had catastrophic consequences for the USA. Probably more and worse 9/11s. Stopping that, keeping our ability to effectively project power, demonstrating that we will not be attacked with out consequences, realigning the middle east to a more democratic, egalitarian and freer paradigm would be a worthwhile conclusion to something that was already started.
page: 1 2
Similar articles
- Al-Maliki says ex-Baathists cleared to run in elections
- Iraq parliament approves long delayed elections law
- Iraqi Christians demand inquiry into killings, intimidation
- Iraqi parliament delays discussion of electoral law (Roundup)
- Iraqi parliament delays discussion of electoral law
Latest Headlines in Middle East
- 1. Iraq parliament postpones vote on election law veto
- 2. Lebanese mother confesses to wiping out family
- 3. UAE police give haircuts to 'indecent' youths
- 4. Iran's Revolutionary Guards to hold military manoeuvres
- 5. UN panel condemns Iran's crackdown on protesters
News from Other Sites
Your Talkback on this Story