So is America finally getting wiser? Who still believes this nonsense?

by Jourles 76 Replies latest social current

• 

  kid-A

  Partitions may also prove to be quite tricky, would be dividiing up the spoils of the crude oil exports between the three, assuming that their territories would not have an equal share of the wells.

  I completely agree, particularly in terms of the oil reserves, as all three factions would want their share. Certainly Turkey does NOT want the Kurds establishing an independent state as this would cause all sorts of problems within Turkeys borders. An alternative to three completely independent states, would be the establishment of three autonomous "provinces" (sunni, shiite and kurd) with a loose, centralized federal government represented equally by all three groups to administer the oil industry and central bank, yet leave matters of defense, education, culture and religion entirely up to each individual province.

  Regrettably, I think this is wishful thinking however. I believe the bad blood between these groups runs far too deep for any form of co-operative government to ever serve as a federal, unifying entity.
• 

  hillary_step

  James,

  As you are in a mood for simple answers to straight questions, might I ask you one?

  Do you believe that the invasion of Iraq was a huge military blunder or not? Yes, or no?

  The answer to this impacts where the US & UK can go from here.

  HS
• 

  Mary

  I watched a movie the other day called Why We Fight. Very interesting and thorough documentary on the mentality of some very high up in US politics who not only want to control all the oil, they want to promote their very own brand of "democracy" on the rest of the world. Living here in Canada, I enjoy basically the same freedoms that they do south of the border. That's the way this country evolved. But to try and force democracy on a country and culture that are not ready for it yet, has caused nothing but misery. Yes Saddam Hussein was a piece of shit ruler, but the USA's invasion of a country that never threatened them, was and has been, an absolute disaster.

  Most Americans that I've spoken to do not agree with George Dubya's 'War on Terror'. Funny how you can lie to 250,000,000 about WMD, be responsible for thousands of deaths and put the country into debt to the tune of over a trillion dollars and you're not impeached. I guess that's because Georige Boy didn't commit the unforgivable sin and have a 21 year old on her knees in the Oval Office when he was implementing the plans for invasion.
• 

  james_woods

  Sir, you deserve a straight answer ---

  I do not think it was a huge military blunder. The military part of the war was won with reasonable dispatch.

  I think it was a huge political blunder to do so at the time we did (i.e. - the second invasion..)

  I think the proper time to do it was to have done so when Saddam invaded Kuwait the first time. We did not properly finish the job.

  So, no - if I had been Bush, Jr. I would not have invaded Iraq. And if I had been Bush, Sr., we would not have thought we needed to.

  Given that scenario, and given that the 9/11 attacks had still taken place (which nobody can know, of course), I think Iran would have been the place to attack. After Afghanistan.

  So, my strategy would have been different than what we did. That does not necessarily make George W. and Donald Rumsfield idiots, however - it might just make me the idiot instead. I do know that for Americans to hope for an American embarassment in Iraq is sick thinking that borders on treason.

  PS - I am sorry I misunderstood your site name the other day - I know nothing about mountain climbing except that it is cold and dangerous. I thouught you were a female Hillary Clinton supporter! Really! -

  James (of the I thought that K2 was a kind of ski class)
• 

  heathen

  It's real funny watching them try to force a democracy on a countriy whos majority are not interested . I don't think Iraq was an immediate threat but I do think that N. korea may have eventually tried to sell nukes to Saddaam . Much like they are threatening to do with other evil groups . I agree with Simon to a degree that the US knows of other energy sources and could easily cut back on fossil fuels , the problem is greed when you talk about a free market . We know we were lied to big time on Iraq and this is about the oil more than anything else .Also the US seems very concerned about Israels security . I've heard plenty of people stating that they believe this was just a way to get close to Iran who is a real threat as well and is developing nukes . It's really a huge pile poopy that the US has stepped in and is now commited and I agree that something should be done as far as removing GW from office , in a democracy the people rule not the government .
• 

  james_woods

  Well, Heathen - he will be removed from office about January 2009...for sure. Casto will probably not be removed unless he kicks. That is the benefit of democracy.

  I am going to disagree about the Iraqis not wanting democracy - they sure seemed eager to vote the last couple of times...(remember the blue thumb displays?) - you have to admit that they were never going to have the chance to try it as long as Saddam was there.

  In a way, this kind of (dont want democracy) thing could be taken as a sort of "stereotype" of the Iraq or mideast people in general.

  I was also encouraged to see that there are presently developing demonstrations in Iraq because of the mullahs spending billions for missiles to give to the Hezbolla while they have not done much of anything to help their own people from earthquake, Iran-Iraq war, etc. I say give the ordinary mid-eastern man (and woman) in the street a little more credit than that!
• 

  james_woods

  Oops - meant to say Iran in that last paragraph, obviously.

  All Texans love democracy but we are universally dyslexic.
• 

  heathen

  I would think that if they wanted democracy they would have been willing to use the US constitution as a basis for constructing their government , instead they want the koran , so now they are attempting some sort of theocracy . I don't like GW so won't miss him when he's gone either .
• 

  james_woods

  Heathen, you have that right for sure - the hard-case Islamics just have a blind spot when it comes to religious influence in government. But, new Iraq is a step beyond the Mullahs in Iran.

  You know, though - a lot of people think the US Government got a little carried away with protestant christian thought in the beginning too - but at least we had a constitution to protect from that tendency.
• 

  hillary_step

  James,

  Heathen, you have that right for sure - the hard-case Islamics just have a blind spot when it comes to religious influence in government. But, new Iraq is a step beyond the Mullahs in Iran.

  It always was.

  Perhaps you have forgotten the long and bitter war fought between the two nations? In fact an argument could be made that in fact Iraq was a far more secular society in terms of the control of power, before the war than at present.

  HS