Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder The problem is that there is no singular "they", something we arrogantly failed to take into account. Shiites, Sunnis, Kurds and who knows what else think they should run things. While the following is NOT an endorsement of Saddam Hussein, there's a reason why his type of dictatorial government kept a lid on things for so long. It takes that type of brutality to keep those groups in line. Left to free will, they're anarchists.
Originally Posted By DAR And I think being killed because you didn't agree with Saddam's government. Or watching your wife and daughter raped is just as bad. It's pretty much a damned if you do damned if you don't situation.
Originally Posted By cmpaley >>And without the hard right supporting him, he's got no one left except the christians, and they'll believe anything they're told.<< This is a very offensive statement. I am a Christian and I certainly do not and did not support Bush in the last election. I see this man for what he truly is (not pro-life) and can't support him under any circumstances.
Originally Posted By Jim in Merced CA <I expected them to step up and take control of their country.> That's your expectation? That because the U.S. decided that it was time for Saddam Hussein to go, that the country of Iraq to 'step up'? That the Iraqi government is a bunch of ingrates? Clearly, it's just not that simple.
Originally Posted By friendofdd I agree with you JIM. It is not as simple as that, or even as simple as portrayed in the posts here. If you take the opinion of two of the best democrats available, Reid and Lieberman, you will realize it is very complicated and there are no easy answers.
Originally Posted By DAR All I'm saying is that it would be nice if the Iraqi army and government stepped it up a little and helped us more. But their pretty much letting us do all the work. Don't they realize this are their countrymen dying.
Originally Posted By gadzuux >> This is a very offensive statement. << I know ... and you're right. And plainly it wouldn't refer to anyone who isn't a bush-supporter, but it's still using the broad brush. The larger point is that the only remaining 'base' that bush has is the christian-right - and they're unshakable. Not because bush is such a great christian, but because that's what they're told to think. But no - not 'all' christians, and not 'all' republicans are dumb cluck, plank thick, hayseeds who never enjoyed an original thought. >> I expected them to step up and take control of their country. << Yeah, well I can see why you might think that. But they're good at confounding expectations. For instance, a majority of iraqis want the US to withdraw and just leave them to sort it out themselves. These are the shia, aligned with various militias that now enjoy power in whatever 'central government' iraq has. They want to slaughter the sunnis, but we're standing in the way. It's practically an inevitability that it will happen, sooner or later. Then iran will solidify it's control over what is now iraq and take control of the oil production. And it will probably consume kuwait along with it - possibly preciptating a global war for oil. Sounds terrible, right? Well you can thank bush and his administration for it. What they've done is to provide unfettered access for the shia to gain control and dominance of iraq. This state of affairs may or may not have been the intended consequence - it's hard to guess just how corrupt the bush administration really is. Do you chalk it up to incompetence, or is it neferious intent? Who's to say?
Originally Posted By friendofdd >>>But no - not 'all' christians, and not 'all' republicans are dumb cluck, plank thick, hayseeds who never enjoyed an original thought.<<< How generous of you. I can hardly wait until you admit not all dems are brilliant thinkers.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>All I'm saying is that it would be nice if the Iraqi army and government stepped it up a little and helped us more. But their pretty much letting us do all the work. Don't they realize this are their countrymen dying.<< This is why a timeline is important. President Bush won't hear of it, but it would let the Iraqis know that they have to get it together.
Originally Posted By gadzuux >> ... but it would let the Iraqis know that they have to get it together. << ... assuming that they WANT us to continue the occupation. That's a dubious assumption. Again, it's hard for us as 'westerners' to apply our values and beliefs to them. They confound expectations.
Originally Posted By jonvn It's not that they confound expectations, they simply don't want what we want them to want.
Originally Posted By DAR <<This is why a timeline is important. President Bush won't hear of it, but it would let the Iraqis know that they have to get it together>> Announcing a hard timeline is like during a football game the two teams announcing to each other what the next play is going to be. That's why you don't announce a hard timeline publicly, but behind the scenes you tell the Iraqi's to get their crap together.
Originally Posted By alexbook Correct me if I'm wrong (I'm sure someone will), but don't the Administration's plans for balancing the budget in the next few years depend on us getting out of Iraq and Afghanistan in 2009? How is that not setting a timeline? Seems to me the biggest difference between the Administration and Congress is over who gets to decide on the timeline, not whether there should be one.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>Announcing a hard timeline is like during a football game the two teams announcing to each other what the next play is going to be.<< In a football game, the time is right up there on the scoreboard. And the idea that we'll be able to disappear from Iraq without insurgents noticing is silly. So we don't announce it, but we leave. The next day, all hell breaks loose anyway. >>That's why you don't announce a hard timeline publicly, but behind the scenes you tell the Iraqi's to get their crap together.<< Fair enough. So, hopefully, that's what the administration is doing.
Originally Posted By cmpaley >>>> This is a very offensive statement. << I know ... and you're right. And plainly it wouldn't refer to anyone who isn't a bush-supporter, but it's still using the broad brush. The larger point is that the only remaining 'base' that bush has is the christian-right - and they're unshakable. Not because bush is such a great christian, but because that's what they're told to think.<< Funny how I'm a member of a Church that is accused of telling people how to think, yet most Catholics voted for Bush because he claims to be "pro-life." I see him for what he is and know that he's anything BUT pro-life. Why? Because I DO believe in the teachings of the Catholic Church as a whole package, not just one one or two issues. In fact, I voted for nobody in the last presidential election because I could not, as a Catholic, in good conscience vote for such a wicked man. >>But no - not 'all' christians, and not 'all' republicans are dumb cluck, plank thick, hayseeds who never enjoyed an original thought. << Um...thanks, I think.
Originally Posted By DAR >>But no - not 'all' christians, and not 'all' republicans are dumb cluck, plank thick, hayseeds who never enjoyed an original thought. << Interesting I just read Bernard Goldberg's new book and he pretty much said that most liberals view (and realizing the phrase "not all" is included in your statement)Republicans and christians as uneducated dolts.
Originally Posted By Jim in Merced CA <All I'm saying is that it would be nice if the Iraqi army and government stepped it up a little and helped us more. But their pretty much letting us do all the work. Don't they realize this are their countrymen dying.> You don't think the Iraqi government is aware that hundreds of Iragi citizens and soldiers are being killed everyday? They're there -- and living it first-hand.
Originally Posted By jonvn I don't view Republicans as uneducated dolts, just because they are Republican. I don't view Christians that way, either. I do view them as extremely superstitious, as I do someone of any religion.
Originally Posted By melekalikimaka "most liberals" I love it when people make sweeping statements about what ANY group believes, especially ones like that one.
Originally Posted By DAR <<I love it when people make sweeping statements about what ANY group believes, especially ones like that one.>> Hey I didn't say that I agree completely.
