Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
What do you neocons think of...
Author Message
KlutzDio I Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,120
Joined: Sep 2003
Reputation: 0
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #1
 
Mosul, Tikrit, Falujah: all of these areas had pro-Saddam rallies yesterday and today. What do you neocons think of this? Is this some cooked-up bullcrap that was invented by liberal Saddam loving media types? Do you think Jayson Blair is in Iraq manufacturing these kinds of stories?

Fact is, we aren't very well liked over there in Iraq! Fact is, most of those people hate us. Yet, George W. and his warmongering cabinet tell us daily that they love us and they are thanking us daily.
Actually both is true. Some hate us and some love us but the Bush Administration is telling us that the liberal media is only reporting bad news. I would argue that the liberal media reports what sells.

Nonetheless, it is odd that a man who ruled Iraq with an iron fist is getting demonstrations in support. That just doesn't make sense.

Oh yeah, I get it. Bush is wrong about some things!

Anyway, if you believe George W. then the guerilla war should end now that we have the guerilla leader.
12-16-2003 02:45 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


ccs178 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,912
Joined: Nov 2003
Reputation: 26
I Root For: Southern Miss
Location: 39402

CrappiesCrappiesDonators
Post: #2
 
KlutzDio I Wrote:Mosul, Tikrit, Falujah: all of these areas had pro-Saddam rallies yesterday and today. What do you neocons think of this? Is this some cooked-up bullcrap that was invented by liberal Saddam loving media types? Do you think Jayson Blair is in Iraq manufacturing these kinds of stories?

Fact is, we aren't very well liked over there in Iraq! Fact is, most of those people hate us. Yet, George W. and his warmongering cabinet tell us daily that they love us and they are thanking us daily.
Actually both is true. Some hate us and some love us but the Bush Administration is telling us that the liberal media is only reporting bad news. I would argue that the liberal media reports what sells.

Nonetheless, it is odd that a man who ruled Iraq with an iron fist is getting demonstrations in support. That just doesn't make sense.

Oh yeah, I get it. Bush is wrong about some things!

Anyway, if you believe George W. then the guerilla war should end now that we have the guerilla leader.
There are Pro-Stalin rallies in Russia every year on his birthday. Neo-Nazi rallies in Germany all the time. There was a pro-fascist rally in Italy last week. I guess WWII was just an incredible waste of time and money. I guess, by your logic, the Klan marches and white supremacist groups in the Mid-west are proof that the civil rights movement was nothing but folly.

Sometimes doing the right thing isn't popular.
12-16-2003 03:12 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
OUGwave Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,172
Joined: Nov 2003
Reputation: 146
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #3
 
KlutzDio I Wrote:Mosul, Tikrit, Falujah: all of these areas had pro-Saddam rallies yesterday and today. What do you neocons think of this? Is this some cooked-up bullcrap that was invented by liberal Saddam loving media types? Do you think Jayson Blair is in Iraq manufacturing these kinds of stories?

Fact is, we aren't very well liked over there in Iraq! Fact is, most of those people hate us. Yet, George W. and his warmongering cabinet tell us daily that they love us and they are thanking us daily.
Actually both is true. Some hate us and some love us but the Bush Administration is telling us that the liberal media is only reporting bad news. I would argue that the liberal media reports what sells.

Nonetheless, it is odd that a man who ruled Iraq with an iron fist is getting demonstrations in support. That just doesn't make sense.

Oh yeah, I get it. Bush is wrong about some things!

Anyway, if you believe George W. then the guerilla war should end now that we have the guerilla leader.
750 people screaming in Fallujah does not impress me. Lets think about that. 750 people in a town of 100,000 where nobody has a damn job. Its not like they were at work. 750 people. Yeah. This is supposed to be the hotbed of pro-saddam loyalists?


THERE WERE 15,000 Anti-terrorism demonstrators in Baghdad alone on 10 December. And they were from every political party, from the Kurdish parties right through the communist party.

And they were all calling for attacks against Coalition forces and the Iraqi people to stop.

So naturally it wasn't covered in the news.

Here's a pic:

[Image: 43.JPG]


For more, check out this Iraqi weblog and the picture albums it has posted:

<a href='http://healingiraq.blogspot.com/archives/2003_12_01_healingiraq_archive.html#107107940577248802' target='_blank'>photos</a>
12-16-2003 06:26 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Wryword Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 974
Joined: Aug 2002
Reputation: 3
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #4
 
Dio, you have to be careful where you get your news. I have no doubt that those who have much to lose from Sodom's fall are "demonstrating". But to suppose that the average Iraqi wants to see Sodom back in power strikes me as being unbelievable on its face. Sodom was a great admirer of Stalin. I simply am not able to believe that anyone would choose to live under a reign of institutionalized terror. There are many here and in the West generally who have deeper problems with the cure of this problem than with the problem. They are at best fools. You need to get a balanced source of news, and that means going well beyond the established news organs here.
12-16-2003 09:37 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
KlutzDio I Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,120
Joined: Sep 2003
Reputation: 0
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #5
 
The guy with the kitty-cat picture and Wry set up some nice strawman fallacies in response to the original post on this thread.
" I guess WWII was just an incredible waste of time and money."
1.I never said anything about WW2. I never made one argument whatsoever about WW2 and its aftermath.
"But to suppose that the average Iraqi wants to see Sodom back in power strikes me as being unbelievable on its face."
2. I never said they wanted Saddam back in power and that too was not my argument. I merely stated that we aren't very well liked over there and I wondered why such a dictator is compelling folks to demonstrate on his behalf.

Basically, a strawman fallacy is when Arguer 2 responds to a claim made by Arguer1 in which Arguer 2 completely misrepresents Arguer 1's argument so that it seems they support a position that is unsupportable.

Unsupportable claims my opponents said that I said but didn't say:
"" I guess WWII was just an incredible waste of time and money." and
""But to suppose that the average Iraqi wants to see Sodom back in power strikes me as being unbelievable on its face."

Actually though, my original post in this thread wasn't much of an argument. I was only trying to get you people who think Iraq is all rosey and sweet to wake up and smell the Arabica beans. We are not very well liked over there. I know we just can't pick up and leave but the fact remains, Muslims hate us. I wonder why?
12-16-2003 11:55 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


ccs178 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,912
Joined: Nov 2003
Reputation: 26
I Root For: Southern Miss
Location: 39402

CrappiesCrappiesDonators
Post: #6
 
KlutzDio I Wrote:Actually though, my original post in this thread wasn't much of an argument. I was only trying to get you people who think Iraq is all rosey and sweet to wake&nbsp; up and smell the Arabica beans. We are not very well liked over there. I&nbsp; know we just can't pick up and leave but the fact remains, Muslims hate us. I wonder why?
I was simply applying your logic to historical events. The demostrations that you point out are incidental. They carry no weight and have no value at all. They are the political equivalent to the idiot face-painters you see at every sporting event, especially the ones that are televised.

Who thinks war is rosey? Bad things happen in war. Gee, thanks for the update. You are not exactly spouting any great revelations with that little nugget of info.

I see you avoided the post about the several thousand Iraqis of ALL political persuasions holding demonstrations against the attacks being made on Coalition forces. Typical, choose only what you want to hear and know only what you heard.
12-17-2003 12:21 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
KlutzDio I Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,120
Joined: Sep 2003
Reputation: 0
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #7
 
ccs178 Wrote:I was simply applying your logic to historical events. The demostrations that you point out are incidental. They carry no weight and have no value at all. They are the political equivalent to the idiot face-painters you see at every sporting event, especially the ones that are televised.

Who thinks war is rosey? Bad things happen in war. Gee, thanks for the update. You are not exactly spouting any great revelations with that little nugget of info.

I see you avoided the post about the several thousand Iraqis of ALL political persuasions holding demonstrations against the attacks being made on Coalition forces. Typical, choose only what you want to hear and know only what you heard.
I'm a face-painter.

We're the Rebels, no one can beat us! :laugh:

I didn't avoid any posts. I read all of them on this thread. Had you read my original post you would have noticed that I said, "Actually both is true. Some hate us and some love us but the Bush Administration is telling us that the liberal media is only reporting bad news."

The reason I brought this up is because I was watching C-SPAN the other day and they replayed a press conference that aired back in Feb. of 03 in which Rumsfeld told the press corps that the Iraqis want us to invade and depose Saddam for them. Rumsfeld and Bush said they'd welcome us with open arms, flowers, parades, etc. That did happen as did protests by those Iraqis that want us out. In some areas of the country they are overwhelmingly pro-American and they don't drink French wine (those durn French, doh!). But, in other areas of the country, namely Baghdad, Tikrit, Falujah, they are overwhelmingly anti-American.
See, the nation of Iraq is just too large and too diverse to say that they love us and they are happy that we are arresting, shooting, bombing, etc. their countrymen everyday.

One reason many nations didn't go along with us on this war is because the mess that would result. It is a mess over there. Not entirely a mess, but a mess nonetheless. The Bush administration was ill-prepared to deal with the post-war country. So many factions are vying for power and the largest three groups (Shi'a, Sunni and Kurds) can't get along. Bush had researchers telling him this prior to the war, the researchers predicted the post-war nation would be a mess and what did Bush's chief of staff do? He fired the researchers!

As long as our guys and gals die over there, I will blame this administration because this war was not necessary.

How have any Americans benefitted as a result of pre-emptive war against a weak nation like Iraq?

Lastly, I don't think the situation over there can compare to WW2. That was a completely different era and WW2 was not a pre-emptive war for the U.S.
12-17-2003 11:13 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Wryword Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 974
Joined: Aug 2002
Reputation: 3
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #8
 
KlutzDio I Wrote:The guy with the kitty-cat picture and Wry set up some nice strawman fallacies in response to the original post on this thread.
" I guess WWII was just an incredible waste of time and money."
1.I never said anything about WW2. I never made one argument whatsoever about WW2 and its aftermath.
"But to suppose that the average Iraqi wants to see Sodom back in power strikes me as being unbelievable on its face."
2. I never said they wanted Saddam back in power and that too was not my argument. I merely stated that we aren't very well liked over there and I wondered why such a dictator is compelling folks to demonstrate on his behalf.

Basically, a strawman fallacy is when Arguer 2 responds to a claim made by Arguer1 in which Arguer 2 completely misrepresents Arguer 1's argument so that it seems they support a position that is unsupportable.

Unsupportable claims my opponents said that I said but didn't say:
"" I guess WWII was just an incredible waste of time and money." and
""But to suppose that the average Iraqi wants to see Sodom back in power strikes me as being unbelievable on its face."

Actually though, my original post in this thread wasn't much of an argument. I was only trying to get you people who think Iraq is all rosey and sweet to wake up and smell the Arabica beans. We are not very well liked over there. I know we just can't pick up and leave but the fact remains, Muslims hate us. I wonder why?
I don't think I set up a straw man. But let's say you are right because "they don't like us". What would the standard be here to determine whether they like us? 100% of the population? 75%?

We still have huge risks there. One looming one is a trial for Sodom. This is a huge error. He knows he is dead, but the trial will give him the chance to thunder against the West, die as a martyr. We should have killed him outright; we should kill him after we have broken him and gotten every bit of information we can from him.

The other risk is that we will never get Iraq back on Her feet. She may become addicted to the dope of American welfare money.

Another risk is this democracy thing for Iraq and Afghanistan. We have idiots in Washington, Repub and Demo, who really do think that the whole world wants a political carnival as we have here. Those fools, those simpletons, they don't understand that many peoples of the Earth do not want this sort of thing,or that democracy is not always the best form of government. It is not a one size fits all thing.

As for what this war has done for us, right now I don't know for certain. But I am glad to know that the 4th Div and the 1st Armor are standing guard over the oilfields.

Radical Muslims hate us because we are infidels and we are cultural bullies. We beam our motion pictures, our culture into their society, and they hate it. I can't say I blame them for resenting our cultural imperialism. We are also hated for attempting to impose "democracy" on a part of the world that does not want it. That is yet another Western idea.
12-17-2003 08:08 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
KlutzDio I Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,120
Joined: Sep 2003
Reputation: 0
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #9
 
Alot of truth in your last post, Wry.


WORD!
12-18-2003 12:35 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


rickheel Offline
The Old Bastard
*

Posts: 8,468
Joined: Feb 2002
Reputation: 11
I Root For: Heels
Location:

Donators
Post: #10
 
AP Poll Finds Majority Back War in Iraq

Friday December 19, 2003 7:01 AM


By WILL LESTER

Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) - Americans think the war in Iraq was the right decision by a 2-1 margin and are more inclined to approve of the job done by President Bush in foreign policy and terrorism following the capture of Saddam Hussein, an Associated Press poll found.

They remain wary, however, of the continuing deadly conflict in Iraq.

Saddam's capture appears to have given Bush's re-election prospects a boost: The poll conducted for the AP by Ipsos-Public Affairs found that nearly half of respondents, 45 percent, said they would definitely support Bush's re-election, while 31 percent said they would definitely vote against him.

A month ago, people were evenly divided on that question, at 37 percent definitely for and 37 percent definitely against.

Two-thirds in the poll said they were confident the United States would capture or kill Osama bin Laden, who is believed to have orchestrated the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. That's up from about half who felt that way in a poll in September.

``I'm confident we'll capture Osama bin Laden,'' said Jill Chiccino, a surgical technician from Wilmington, Del. ``I still don't feel that will solve terrorism, but it may help.''

More than six in 10 registered voters, 63 percent, said they approved of Bush's handling of foreign policy and terrorism, up from 54 percent who felt that way in early December in an AP-Ipsos poll. Bush's overall job approval among voters was 59 percent, up from 53 percent in early December but still far below his mid-70s war ratings from earlier this year.

Asked whether they thought Saddam's capture last weekend would cause violence against U.S. troops to increase, decrease or stay about the same, the biggest group, 47 percent, said they expected no change. A third, 33 percent, said violence would decrease and 19 percent said it would increase.

People were evenly divided on whether Saddam would get a fairer trial from an international tribunal or from Iraqi courts.

``Iraqi courts will be controlled and run by the United States,'' said attorney Adam Allen of Tampa, Fla.

Six in 10 thought the government was likely to be embarrassed by some of the information disclosed by Saddam in a trial. That was higher than the percentage of people who felt Saddam's disclosures would embarrass the governments of France, Russia, Britain or Germany.

Six in 10 said the capture made it more likely the United States would get help from longtime allies who opposed the Iraq war, but only 12 percent said they felt that was ``very likely.''

Overall support for Iraq policy was strong in the poll.

Seven in 10 said they believed the Iraq war was an important part of the campaign against terrorism rather than a distraction, as some critics have charged. And by more than a 2-1 margin, people said the war was the right decision and not a mistake.

Respondents were divided on whether the war in Iraq has made terrorist attacks in this country more likely, 40 percent, or less likely, 49 percent.

Almost two-thirds said they expected a terrorist attack on a major U.S. city, building or national landmark in the next year. But only 15 percent said they thought such an attack was very likely. In a different poll in May, almost half said a terrorist attack was very likely in the near future.

``I'm not expecting anything as bad as 9-11,'' said Indiana college student Deanna Moon. But she expected the United States would be attacked by people loyal to Saddam and bin Laden: ``There's going to be something here and there because their followers are so nutty.''

The AP-Ipsos poll of 1,001 adults was taken Monday through Wednesday and had a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3 percentage points, slightly larger for subgroups such as registered voters.
12-19-2003 09:51 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
joebordenrebel Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,968
Joined: Oct 2002
Reputation: 3
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #11
 
And that, little Ricky, was a non sequitur. . .

I know you won't read this, but I'll post it in any event: <a href='http://www.intrepidsoftware.com/fallacy/nonseq.php' target='_blank'>http://www.intrepidsoftware.com/fallacy/nonseq.php</a>
12-22-2003 02:26 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
nate jonesacc Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,215
Joined: Mar 2002
Reputation: 6
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #12
 
I'll help him out a bit...

non se
12-22-2003 04:28 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
calling_the_hogs Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,096
Joined: May 2002
Reputation: 5
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #13
 
Wait a sec... how about all the celebrations in the streetswhen Saddam was captured?

No matter what, some will like, some will hate you.

This whole thread is about agitation

WPS
12-22-2003 06:57 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


KlutzDio I Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,120
Joined: Sep 2003
Reputation: 0
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #14
 
calling_the_hogs Wrote:This whole thread is about agitation
Much like your posts!
12-22-2003 07:30 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
calling_the_hogs Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,096
Joined: May 2002
Reputation: 5
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #15
 
Look at the pot calling the kettle black! :laugh:
12-22-2003 08:41 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
KlutzDio I Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,120
Joined: Sep 2003
Reputation: 0
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #16
 
You got some good pot? Is it hydroponic?
12-23-2003 08:39 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Guest
Unregistered

 
CrappiesNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #17
 
Neos don't smoke pot. They prefer OxyContin. :D
12-23-2003 08:42 AM
Quote this message in a reply
joebordenrebel Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,968
Joined: Oct 2002
Reputation: 3
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #18
 
Returning to the topic at hand. . . (no I'm not! yes I am! no I'm not! yes I am!)

Prostitutes wind up loving their pimps more than anyone who really cares about them.

The same is going on there in Iraq. There are a great many people who LOVE Saddam because they benefited from his policies or enjoyed cushy porn as a result of the status quo. No matter how brutal his iron fist (Israel-like) policies were. No matter how many died. As long as they weren't the ones on the wrong side of his anger, they were happy as lambs.

I'm sure they miss that. Wouldn't you?

Sounds a lot like this country, come to think of it. I think I'll ask Canada to invade and impose a regime change.

We certainly have our share of WMD's!

We are the world's kick-arse leader in terrorism!

Thousands die because of our policies every year (here and abroad)!

I'm not the only one who feels this way. . .
--------------------
Soros calls for 'regime change' in US (bbc news)

Soros's Foundations Network works throughout the world
Billionaire philanthropist George Soros has called for an end to the Bush administration ahead of next year's presidential elections.

Mr Soros - whose Foundations Network has given $1bn around the world to various causes to help tackle poverty and disease - told BBC Radio 4's United Nations Or Not? programme that the US would only stop pursuing "extremist" policies if there was a change at the White House.

"It is only possible if you have a regime change in the United States - in other words if President Bush is voted out of power.

"I am very hopeful that people will wake up and realise that they have been led down the garden path, that actually 11 September has been hijacked by a bunch of extremists to put into effect policies that they were advocating before such as the invasion of Iraq."

Imposing power

Mr Soros added that there was a "false ideology" behind the policies of the Bush administration.

The US is now discovering that it is extremely painful and certainly costly to go it alone
"There is a group of - I would call them extremists - who have the following belief: that international relations are relations of power, not of law, that international law will always follow what power has achieved," he said.

"And therefore [they believe] the United States being the most powerful nation on earth should impose its power, impose its will and its interests on the world and it should do it looking after itself.

"I think this is a very dangerous ideology. It is very dangerous because America is in fact very powerful."

He added that he felt US actions in the build-up to the war on Iraq was evidence of an extremist element in the Bush administration.

"Probably President Chirac would not disagree with this philosophy but he is not so powerful - so I am not so worried about what France is doing," Mr Soros said, referring to France's opposition to the war.

"But America being really the dominant power to be in the grips of such an extremist ideology is very dangerous for the world and that is my major concern."

However, he added that he felt the rift between the US and the United Nations over the war - which President Bush referred to as a "difficult and defining moment" for the UN - had in fact strengthened the UN, rather than weakened it.

"I think that the United States has over-reached," he said.

"What happens to extremists is that they go to extremes and the falsehood in their ideology becomes apparent.

"In a democracy the electorate - which is not extremist - will punish them and they know it, so they have to retreat.

"I think there is a good chance that the US will yet turn to a greater extent to the United Nations because they are now discovering that it is extremely painful and certainly costly to go it alone so in the end the outcome may be to strengthen the United Nations."

State interests

Mr Soros was, however, critical of the UN for what it sees as its inability to function well as a collective of states.

Soros only once gave money to the UN - in Bosnia

"The United Nations is not an organisation that is terribly effective in promoting open society because it is an association of states... states always put their national interests ahead of the common interest.

"So it is not a very effective organisation for changing conditions inside states."

Mr Soros has a history of donating great sums of money to areas in need around the world - but only once has he done this through the UN.

"In Bosnia we gave it to UNHCR - but that was really quite the exception.

"We do interfere in the internal affairs of states, but based on supporting people inside the country who take a certain stance.

"We have actually been quite effective in bringing about democratisation, democratic regime change in Slovakia, Croatia and Yugoslavia, but that's by helping civil society in those countries to mobilise."

Positive response

Mr Soros is highly critical of much government bureaucracy, preferring to make his donations directly to those in need as much as possible.

In June this year he announced he would be drastically cutting back the money he gave to Russia.

And he said that money his fund was pledging to the fight against HIV/Aids would be "more effective" because it was going "only through a governmental organisation."

He conceded too that President Bush's policies on the HIV/Aids pandemic were positive.

"There is some response in America, in the Bush administration, to pressure from some of their constituencies - so there is the Millennium Challenge account, the contribution on fighting HIV/Aids," Mr Soros said.

"Those are positive aspects of the Bush administration. I am very supportive of the Millennium Challenge account - this is the new development aid that they are putting in - and I am very supportive and delighted that President Bush is willing to contribute to the global fund on Aids.

"So I am critical on some aspects of the Bush administration but not every aspect - and here I am actually very supportive.
12-24-2003 01:50 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.