Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <Certainly we know that Arab opinion in general was greatly inflamed by our invasion and occupation. It has cooled somewhat, but fanatics don't tend to cool, and all you need is a relatively small cabal of fanatics to do a great deal of damage, and they tend to think long term.> The evidence seems to suggest Arab opinion is more likely to be favorable toward us than it was pre-Iraq. <a href="http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110007699" target="_blank">http://www.opinionjournal.com/ editorial/feature.html?id=110007699</a>
Originally Posted By cmpaley >>Well, there's no guarantee the sun will come up tomorrow. I guess some of us are optimists.<< Also living in a fantasy world. The sun doesn't "come up." The point on which you are upon the earth rotates back towards the sun. Just trying on obtuseness...how'd I do? ;-)
Originally Posted By woody "What a ridiculous statement. Who here has said they want Saddam out of jail? You just forfeitted all credibility." Your forfeited any pretense of being informed. Try Ramsey Clark. <a href="http://slate.com/id/2131405?nav=tap3" target="_blank">http://slate.com/id/2131405?na v=tap3</a> "Just go back and read that again. Ramsey Clark believes that A) the massacre and torture did occur and B) that it was ordered by his client and C) that he was justified in ordering it and carrying it out."
Originally Posted By woody Interesting poll. <a href="http://opinionnation.modblog.com/?show=blogview&blog_id=782947" target="_blank">http://opinionnation.modblog.c om/?show=blogview&blog_id=782947</a> 41 percent of Democrats give support for Saddam Hussein’s former regime. In a new Opinion/Dynamics poll, Bush’s approval rating made a slight rebound but what I found most interesting is that a large number of Democrats basically want Saddam Hussein back in power. The poll asked: “Do you think the world would be better or worse off if Saddam was still in power.†41% of Democrats said it would be better if he was in power 34% of democrats said it would be worse if he was in power 61% of people think that Hussein either hid/moved/destroyed his weapons 11% unsure where his weapons are 28% say he did not have weapons
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <<"What a ridiculous statement. Who here has said they want Saddam out of jail? You just forfeitted all credibility.">> <Your forfeited any pretense of being informed. Try Ramsey Clark.> Ramsey Clark is on LP?? Wow. I said "who HERE..." You just forfeited any pretense of reading comprehension.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <<Certainly we know that Arab opinion in general was greatly inflamed by our invasion and occupation. It has cooled somewhat, but fanatics don't tend to cool, and all you need is a relatively small cabal of fanatics to do a great deal of damage, and they tend to think long term.>> <The evidence seems to suggest Arab opinion is more likely to be favorable toward us than it was pre-Iraq.> That talked about Pakistan (which by the way is Muslim, but NOT Arab). And it said flat out that the change had nothing to do with support for our invasion, but "The direct cause for this dramatic shift in Muslim opinion is clear: American humanitarian assistance for Pakistani victims of the Oct. 8 earthquake that killed 87,000. The U.S. pledged $510 million for earthquake relief in Pakistan and American soldiers are playing a prominent role in rescuing victims from remote mountainous villages." I think it's great that we've helped in this way and changed some people's minds. But it doesn't mean a). they support our invasion; b). it's done much to help opinion in the Arab world.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <<Or brutal sectarian violence. We'll have to see how that one plays out.>> <Well, there's no guarantee the sun will come up tomorrow. I guess some of us are optimists.> And some of us have blinders on. Optimism is a fine trait, but sometimes hard-headed realism is better. Excess optimism leads to decisions based on forecasts such as "we'll be greeted as liberators..." "the insurgency is just a few dead enders and will be over soon..." "oil revenues will pay for the reconstruction..."
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <That talked about Pakistan (which by the way is Muslim, but NOT Arab).> True, but there are examples of Arab opinions changing as well, such as the recent march of 200,000 Jordanians against al Zarqawi.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <Excess optimism leads to decisions based on forecasts such as "we'll be greeted as liberators..." "the insurgency is just a few dead enders and will be over soon..." "oil revenues will pay for the reconstruction..."> Or the end of the Soviet Union and the tearing down of the Berlin Wall?
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <<That talked about Pakistan (which by the way is Muslim, but NOT Arab). And it said flat out that the change had nothing to do with support for our invasion.>> <True, but there are examples of Arab opinions changing as well, such as the recent march of 200,000 Jordanians against al Zarqawi.> When was there ever documented Jordanian support FOR Zarqawi? <<Excess optimism leads to decisions based on forecasts such as "we'll be greeted as liberators..." "the insurgency is just a few dead enders and will be over soon..." "oil revenues will pay for the reconstruction...">> <Or the end of the Soviet Union and the tearing down of the Berlin Wall?> That was something both parties worked for for 40 years. And that probably would have taken another 10 years or so had not Gorbachev reformed from within (as people like Jeanne Kirkpatrick assured us the soviets would never ever do). But hey - nice distraction from the actual ON-topic examples of excess optimism I gave.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh Well, considering we were greeted as liberators by most Iraqis, and we are winning the battle against the insurgency, and Iraqi oil revenues will pay for a lot of the reconstruction, I didn't think they were as inaccurate as you believed. Meanwhile, I remember many liberals calling President Reagan "naive" for his vision of ending the Soviet threat. "Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty." Was JFK too much of an optimist?
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <Well, considering we were greeted as liberators by most Iraqis,> I don't know what you base that on. Transitory polls from nearly 3 years later? Even today, the polls show most Iraqis feel they are under occupation, and don't like it. That's not the same as being "greeted as liberators." <and we are winning the battle against the insurgency,> What do you base THAT on? What are your "metrics" for that? I don't think we're losing, exactly, but I think we're in the middle of a very long stalemate. <and Iraqi oil revenues will pay for a lot of the reconstruction,> the optimists didn't say "a lot of," they said it would pay for the reconstruction, period. <I didn't think they were as inaccurate as you believed.> Hundreds of billions of dollars later, I wouldn't exactly call them "accurate." <Meanwhile, I remember many liberals calling President Reagan "naive" for his vision of ending the Soviet threat.> Reagan essentially continued the policy first set in place by Truman. And continued by presidents of both parties (Kennedy and Johnson were certainly both cold warriors). And if Breshnev had lived past 1989, or if we'd gotten a Breshnev clone instead of Gorbachev, the wall wouldn't have come down as soon as 1989, either. It would have eventually collapsed of its own weight, but that would have been the culmination of a very consistent 40 (or in a Gorbachev-less soviet union, perhaps 50)-year policy. <"Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty." Was JFK too much of an optimist?> Stirring words of the sort one uses at an innauguration. But when it comes to actually committing a country to war, I'll take hard-headed realism over optimism, thank you.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <I don't know what you base that on. Transitory polls from nearly 3 years later? Even today, the polls show most Iraqis feel they are under occupation, and don't like it.> I base it on the reports and polls at the time. And the polls in Iraq now don't show what you say they do. <What do you base THAT on? What are your "metrics" for that? I don't think we're losing, exactly, but I think we're in the middle of a very long stalemate.> I base it on lots of things. To recite a few: 1)We're getting more and more tips from the Iraqi people about insurgents. 2)We're cutting off their supply lines, and denying them areas to operate out of. 3)They're sending out letters complaining about having troubles recruiting new members. <the optimists didn't say "a lot of," they said it would pay for the reconstruction, period.> No, they didn't. <Reagan essentially continued the policy first set in place by Truman.> No, he didn't. And there were many cries from "realists" that his more aggressive stance towards the Soviets wasn't helpful. <But when it comes to actually committing a country to war, I'll take hard-headed realism over optimism, thank you.> And I'll take optimism over pessimism.
Originally Posted By ADMIN <font color="#FF0000">Message removed by an administrator. <a href="MsgBoard-Rules.asp" target="_blank">Click here</a> for the LaughingPlace.com Community Standards.</font>
Originally Posted By woody Dabob2: Nice to see you back to playing word games again. When you can't debate, you resort to word games. BTW: I love it when Democrats won't admit they love Saddam. You must be Saddam's hidden fan club.
Originally Posted By StillThePassHolder "BTW: I love it when Democrats won't admit they love Saddam." Maybe they will once you get over mooning over Hitler.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>When you can't debate, you resort to word games.<< If you ask real nice, maybe he'll try not to go over two-syllable ones so you can keep up.
Originally Posted By woody "If you ask real nice, maybe he'll try not to go over two-syllable ones so you can keep up." Kar2oonMan: Maybe you should ask Dabob2 to debate the topic instead of where he wants to steer the debate.
Originally Posted By Beaumandy <<BTW: I love it when Democrats won't admit they love Saddam. You must be Saddam's hidden fan club.>> Did anyone see Saddam today tell the court that: " You can't trust America, they lied about Iraq having WMD's!! " He is using the lefts talking points very well. Hopefully he can kep them coming, win his trial, and get back into power where he belongs. Memo to the left: If the worst dictator since Hitler is using YOUR words as his defense, you need to step back and take a look at yourself, and try and figure out what the heck happened to yourself.
