Iraq: Civil War? WayTooEarlyToTell? - Page 24 - Mercedes-Benz Forum

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #231 of 318 (permalink) Old 11-29-2006, 08:33 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 95 E300
Location: Inside my head
Posts: 36,850
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 392 Post(s)
No doubt, a repeating big bore.
Botnst is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #232 of 318 (permalink) Old 11-29-2006, 08:49 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
FeelTheLove's Avatar
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 83 Astral Silver 280 SL
Location: Planet Houston
Posts: 28,829
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Botnst
You're dithpicable! -- Daffy FTL.

your numbers are beautiful creations.

Your dream time is a gentle sea.

You have no worries.

B
You demean the deaths of these people with your fucking attitude.

Recall that earlier generations faced down fascism and communism not just with missiles and tanks, but with sturdy alliances and enduring convictions. They understood that our power alone cannot protect us, nor does it entitle us to do as we please. Instead, they knew that our power grows through its prudent use; our security emanates from the justness of our cause, the force of our example, the tempering qualities of humility and restraint.

-President Barack Obama, 1st Inaugural address
FeelTheLove is offline  
post #233 of 318 (permalink) Old 11-29-2006, 08:55 PM
RFC
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Mentioned: Post(s)
Quoted: Post(s)
Holy defeatist attitude with a gun, Batman
post #234 of 318 (permalink) Old 11-29-2006, 09:01 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
FeelTheLove's Avatar
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 83 Astral Silver 280 SL
Location: Planet Houston
Posts: 28,829
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Reportedly Fucks Chihauhas?

Recall that earlier generations faced down fascism and communism not just with missiles and tanks, but with sturdy alliances and enduring convictions. They understood that our power alone cannot protect us, nor does it entitle us to do as we please. Instead, they knew that our power grows through its prudent use; our security emanates from the justness of our cause, the force of our example, the tempering qualities of humility and restraint.

-President Barack Obama, 1st Inaugural address
FeelTheLove is offline  
post #235 of 318 (permalink) Old 11-29-2006, 09:06 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 95 E300
Location: Inside my head
Posts: 36,850
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 392 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by FeelTheLove
You demean the deaths of these people with your fucking attitude.
You create a fantasy world with your attitude.

I am impressed especially with your use of reproductive connotations when discussing death and destruction.

B
Botnst is offline  
post #236 of 318 (permalink) Old 11-30-2006, 04:47 AM
BenzWorld Elite
 
Bruce R.'s Avatar
 
Date registered: Aug 2002
Vehicle: 2002 SLK 32 AMG, bone stock. 1987 190E 2.3-16 valve (destroyed). 2005 E320 new toy.
Location: Near Washington, DC
Posts: 14,926
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 41 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Botnst
You create a fantasy world with your attitude.
I am impressed especially with your use of reproductive connotations when discussing death and destruction.
B
What's important to note is even though he does this kind of crap, he calls others " wack jobs". Calling the kettle black doesn't really cover the point does it ???

"Negotiating with Obama is like playing chess with a pigeon, the pigeon knocks over all the pieces, on the board and then struts around like it won the game."
Vladimir Putin

"They have gun control in Cuba. They have universal health care in Cuba. So why do they want to come here?"
Paul Harvey 8/31/94


"The only people who have quick answers don't have the responsibility of making the decisions."
Justice Clarence Thomas
Bruce R. is offline  
post #237 of 318 (permalink) Old 11-30-2006, 07:27 AM
BenzWorld Elite
 
FeelTheLove's Avatar
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 83 Astral Silver 280 SL
Location: Planet Houston
Posts: 28,829
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Botnst
You create a fantasy world with your attitude.

I am impressed especially with your use of reproductive connotations when discussing death and destruction.

B
What fantasy world is that Botnst? The one where Iraq was building an atom bomb? Or the one where Iraq was awash in nerve gas? The one where one thinks that the idea of "democracy" would be stronger than religious fanaticism in Iraq? Or perhaps the fantasy that Iraq is even a country? Fantasies? You're fucking overrun with them, here is the reality: since 1991, we have visited a horrific world of death and destruction on the people of Iraq, through bombings, sanctions that caused the starvation death of thousands of children, and then the mass murder in our Nazi-style invasion and occupation of Iraq. You, you racist fuck, sit there and say how wonderful it all is because only 3,000 Americans died and only 25,000 American men and women had their fucking arms and legs blown off, a nice easy war, even though the reality is we turned this country into a shooting gallery where innocent people were sitting ducks. They drink water full of feces and piss thanks to us, and children die of measles because the hospitals are destroyed or overrun. 3,000 of them die every month in the official counts, and probably thousands more out in the countryside, figures you poo-poo as if it means fucking nothing. You are fucking animal, man. If this is the America you want, I want no fucking part of it.

Recall that earlier generations faced down fascism and communism not just with missiles and tanks, but with sturdy alliances and enduring convictions. They understood that our power alone cannot protect us, nor does it entitle us to do as we please. Instead, they knew that our power grows through its prudent use; our security emanates from the justness of our cause, the force of our example, the tempering qualities of humility and restraint.

-President Barack Obama, 1st Inaugural address
FeelTheLove is offline  
post #238 of 318 (permalink) Old 11-30-2006, 07:34 AM
BenzWorld Elite
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 95 E300
Location: Inside my head
Posts: 36,850
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 392 Post(s)
The Fighting Over the Fighting
Let’s at least be clear about the implications of and explanations for our criticisms and suggestions.

By Victor Davis Hanson


It looks as if Americans have pushed the rock of Iraq almost to the crest, only to let go, like Sisyphus, terrified that it will roll back; we hope only that we will not be crushed in its descent. While giving up now would be disastrous, we will almost certainly not succeed unless we change our tactics.

The Maliki government in the Green Zone wants the Americans quietly to kill the murderous insurgents. The hope is that this would give the Iraqi republic prestige and safety, at the same time allowing it the necessary denial of culpability for the necessary bloodletting.

We, in turn, wait for a tough government to emerge that will either provide a sense of fairness and safety for all Iraqis and so deflate the insurgency, or at least join us in a full assault on the jihadists.

In the meantime, the enemy counts on the evening news showcasing the daily harvest of Iraqis, and the killing of at least four or five Americans each week, to show the worried Arab world the mess that will always follow the appearance of Westerners on Muslim soil, while insidiously sapping our will back home.

Here at home we rage incessantly over the problem and its solution. The American public, for its part, has given the administration the go-ahead in two national elections, but apparently not in a third. In all the hysterical debate over Iraq, rarely do we find specifics about the options we currently face.

What we need at our possible 11th hour is not more shrillness, but concrete facts supporting the variously proposed remedies. Take, for instance, the call for a large increase in troops. To suggest increases is fine, and they may indeed be necessary, but fist there must be an explanation of precisely how thousands more soldiers would help the current situation.

We know that that another 50,000 or so Americans would raise our profile in Iraq, spur more domestic hysteria, increase the cost of the war, increase the likelihood of Iraqi dependency, and enlarge the rear echelon compounds throughout Iraq that support our frontline fighters. But we are not sure that they would bring about greater security — that is, unless they were allowed different rules of engagement than are currently allowed in Iraq.

Will the thousands of more troops get permission from the Iraqi government to disarm the militias and smash insurgent enclaves? Can they target a Sadr and his thugs with impunity? Will they be able to kill Syrian and Iranian infiltrators across the border? Will they be able to target those in “civilian” dress who help plant the IEDs? And is all that not happening now because there are too few boots on the ground?

Before anyone simply cries for more troops, please explain precisely what they are supposed to do differently than what we are doing now, inasmuch as throughout history it is what fighters do, rather than how many of them there are, that determines their success or failure.

Since critics always evoke Vietnam, we should carefully examine its three phases: (1) 1963-1969, a phase of constant troop increases; (2) 1970-73, a phase of a steady downsizing of the American presence as Vietnamization took hold and counterinsurgency improved; (3) 1974-5, a phase of abandonment of the South Vietnamese government, followed by the conventional victory of the Communists. The second phase was the wisest course and should be the closest to our present strategy.

One can see why our military would expect 500,000 Americans to battle a North Vietnamese army of one million, with Soviet and Chinese advisors manning batteries in the North, along with another couple of hundred thousand Viet Cong guerrillas in the South.

Even generous estimates of the number of insurgents in Iraq conclude there are about 10,000 active killers — a fraction of just the irregulars in the south of Vietnam alone. Why then, when the numerical disparities are so much more favorable to our cause than during the Vietnam War, are we, rather than our vastly outnumbered enemies, lamenting the paucity of troops? That we have not secured the country may be due to the limitations put on our soldiers rather than their number; and to our preference for conventional rather than counter-insurgency fighting.

By the same token, Democrats are murmuring about timetables and “redeployment,” the current euphemism for flight, but they need to articulate exactly what they mean. We withdraw, and then what?

Are Americans ready to accept tens of thousands of refugees into the United States when those reformers who believed we’d stay and protect them are targeted for death? And what would we do if Turkey threatens Kurdistan with invasion once its patron has abandoned it?

And where, in a new region of jihadist ascendancy, are troops to be redeployed to? Other Middle East countries? What Middle Eastern illegitimate autocrat would want to host a retreating and defeated American army, a sort of modern version of Xenophon’s orphaned Ten Thousand? Indeed, the problem would not be redeployment to a nearby host kingdom, but just maintaining Centcom forces where they are now, once the Arab Street smells blood and adjusts to an Islamic victory. If IEDs worked in Iraq, why not also in Kuwait and Qatar?

Any gain from having more military forces “freed” from Iraq to face crises elsewhere would be vastly overshadowed by the far greater number of new crises that would soon arise — once Iranians, Syrians, Chinese, North Koreans, and the new Latin American Communists sought to emulate the successful Iraqi formula of defeating and humiliating the U. S. military.

Third, what does unbalanced reporting really mean? We all harp that the media — specifically, the wire services, network television, and the international stations like the BBC and CNN — all focused on Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo Bay, the carnage left by IEDs and suicide bombers, and the allegations against the Marines at Haditha, and neglected entirely the damage we did to the terrorists and Islamic fascists, or the singularity of seeing parliaments in places like Kabul and Baghdad.

But the important question left unspoken is Why? Was the unbalanced converge, in the case of leftwing elites in the American media, a simple effort to embarrass Republican policy, allowing more sympathetic Democrats to regain power? In the case of the envious European media, was it to take down the Americans a notch or two to remind us that we are not as powerful as we think?

Or is the bias a more general result of a Western elite so deeply conflicted about its own culture, and so fundamentally unable to define its own civilization, that it either doesn’t care whether it wins, or in fact wishes that the West lose in Iraq?

One can grasp that generic hypocrisy by reviewing all the journalists’ charges leveled against Gulf War I — too much realpolitik; too much pay-as-you-go war thinking; too much Colin Powell and James Baker and not enough Paul Wolfowitz; too much worry about stability and not enough about millions of poor Kurds and Shiites; too much worry about empowering Iran. Then compare those charges to those leveled against Gulf War II — too much naïve idealism; too much expense in lives and treasure; not enough Colin Powell and James Baker and too much Paul Wolfowitz; too little worry about regional stability and too much given to ungovernable Iraqis; and too little thought about empowering Iran.

The one common denominator? Whatever the United States does is suspect; and journalists without responsibility for governance, either for setting policy or for its implementation, are always brighter than generals, politicians, and policy planners saddled with it.

The truth is that wealthy Western elites in the media have evolved beyond worry over the basics of their civilization. They are so insulated, even after September 11, that they don’t believe there is much connection between liberty, freedom, consensual government, freedom of expression, and the everyday mundane things they depend on — whether excellent medical care, clean water, nice cars, neat electronic gadgets, eating out, or safety in their streets. A nuclear Iran, a missile-laden North Korea, a theocracy in oil-rich Iraq, an unleashed terrorist-sponsoring Syria, and an emboldened Hezbollah — all these still could still never quite take away their good life, so strong is the assurance of their never-ending comfort zone that they could not conceive of ever losing it.

And thus the most vehement and angry critics find it possible, even desirable, to nibble away at their own civilization’s efforts, on the understanding that a loss in Iraq would be only an apparent loss. That defeat would not entail any material detriment to themselves, but surely would enhance their own sense of contrarian self-righteousness and self-worth, as they boldly caricature the very culture that so empowered them.

So yes, let us talk about sending more troops, or taking them out altogether, or cry about bad news coverage. But the truth is that, if they were given more tactical leeway to go on the offensive, we would already have enough soldiers in Iraq to win a victory that even a hostile media will have to acknowledge and enemies watching must respect — but only if we persevere here at home in this latest climate of renewed hysteria.

— Victor Davis Hanson is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution. He is the author, most recently, of A War Like No Other. How the Athenians and Spartans Fought the Peloponnesian War.
Botnst is offline  
post #239 of 318 (permalink) Old 11-30-2006, 08:00 AM
BenzWorld Elite
 
FeelTheLove's Avatar
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 83 Astral Silver 280 SL
Location: Planet Houston
Posts: 28,829
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
This war has descended into barbarism, and taken us with it.

Recall that earlier generations faced down fascism and communism not just with missiles and tanks, but with sturdy alliances and enduring convictions. They understood that our power alone cannot protect us, nor does it entitle us to do as we please. Instead, they knew that our power grows through its prudent use; our security emanates from the justness of our cause, the force of our example, the tempering qualities of humility and restraint.

-President Barack Obama, 1st Inaugural address
FeelTheLove is offline  
post #240 of 318 (permalink) Old 11-30-2006, 08:24 AM
Administratoris Emeritus
 
GeeS's Avatar
 
Date registered: Aug 2002
Vehicle: 2021 SL770
Location: Fountain Hills, AZ
Posts: 44,915
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Quoted: 591 Post(s)
I think it's more accurate to say that we have taken it to the only place it was ever going to go, and it's not there yet.

"If spending money you don't have is the height of stupidity, borrowing money to give it away is the height of insanity." -- anon
GeeS is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

  Mercedes-Benz Forum > General Mercedes-Benz Forums > Off-Topic

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Mercedes-Benz Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in











  • Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
     
    Thread Tools
    Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
    Email this Page Email this Page
    Display Modes
    Linear Mode Linear Mode



    Similar Threads
    Topic Author Forum Replies Last Post
    Lebanon: Civil War? Maybe! DP Off-Topic 94 12-03-2006 10:18 AM
    But it's not a 'civil war'...... FeelTheLove Off-Topic 13 04-08-2006 07:50 PM
    As CIA predicted over two years ago, result of Iraq election will be civil war FeelTheLove Off-Topic 19 12-29-2005 02:19 PM
    Is a civil war imminent? phaedrus_242 Off-Topic 40 03-04-2005 09:53 PM
    Are we headed for a civil war? sflori Off-Topic 33 11-01-2004 11:39 PM

    Posting Rules  
    You may post new threads
    You may post replies
    You may not post attachments
    You may not edit your posts

    BB code is On
    Smilies are On
    [IMG] code is On
    HTML code is Off
    Trackbacks are On
    Pingbacks are On
    Refbacks are On

     

    Title goes here

    close
    video goes here
    description goes here. Read Full Story
    For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome