If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above.
You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.
To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Do you think that Iraq is better off now after our attempts to counteract the morally egregious acts of Hussein?
You can't just look at these issues in terms of morality, you have to look at them practically too. The US can't "fix" all of the moral problems in the world, and it often makes them worse by trying to deal with problems it doesn't fully understand.
Do you think that Iraq is better off now after our attempts to counteract the morally egregious acts of Hussein?
I don't agree with our incursion into Iraq. I stood against it then, and my opinion on that hasn't changed. Going forward however, I do think Iraq is marginally better off now. Hussein was committing genocide, he slaughtered 100s of 1,000s of his own countrymen, and though it's by no means peaceful there, the overall mortality rate has dropped since his ouster.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
I don't agree with our incursion into Iraq. I stood against it then, and my opinion on that hasn't changed. Going forward however, I do think Iraq is marginally better off now. Hussein was committing genocide, he slaughtered 100s of 1,000s of his own countrymen, and though it's by no means peaceful there, the overall mortality rate has dropped since his ouster.
This is conjecture as there are no reliable statistics of either how many people Hussein killed or how many have been killed since the invasion, and the estimates for both are all over the place and vary wildly based on who is reporting them.
Regardless, both numbers, whatever they actually are, are horrific. If the justification for war was lessening human suffering in a meaningful way, it was a colossal failure.
Do you think that Iraq is better off now after our attempts to counteract the morally egregious acts of Hussein?
You can't just look at these issues in terms of morality, you have to look at them practically too. The US can't "fix" all of the moral problems in the world, and it often makes them worse by trying to deal with problems it doesn't fully understand.
I am looking at it "practically". Given the three time periods in question:
-Saddam contained (post 1991 - 2003)
-American administration (2003 - ????)
-American withdrawal (???? - Today)
"Practically", which of those 3 periods do you think was the most stable for Iraqi civilians? (hint it's not the first or the last option). Invading Iraq might have been a mistake given the pretext that was used to justify it. But Invading Iraq did not cause the current chaos, however leaving Iraq prematurely did.
You are flat out wrong regarding your final statement. West Germany, South Korea, Japan, Vietnam. That does not mean to imply that US foreign policy has a 100% success track record, but what better "practical" alternatives would you prefer on the world stage Iran, Saudi, China, Russia, the UN?
(
Last edited by Hawkeye_a; Jan 25, 2016 at 02:05 PM.
)
What was the big takeaway I was supposed to get from this? I can certainly agree the pacifism will cost lives through inaction, but that's not why people want to get out of the middle east. I also see no proposed solution or game plan in the article.
A brilliant piece by a former Islamic extremist. His take: It's time for the Islamic Reformation.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
So they started groping Russian women, like they did in Germany, and woke up in the hospital. This is the appropriate response, Russian men don't put up with that crap.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
So no one seems to be buying the latest cease-fire and negotiations for the Syrian conflict that basically allows the Russians to carry on while the rest stop and see what happens.
Given the inability of the west to put up any kind of effective or unified plan to stop the ongoing nightmare, or any solid idea what to do afterwards (hello Iraq and Afghanistan again), I was wondering what would be worse. The status quo or just letting the Russians get on with it. I would assume the end of that story would be a restored Assad inside Syria's pre war boundaries.
Now Assad was a dictator but the vast majority of Syrians lived reasonably prosperous and (importantly) secular lives for decades under his regime.
I think my basic thought was, what could the Russians do that was worse than our feeble efforts?
This space for Hire! Reasonable rates. Reach an audience of literally dozens!
Apart from not having any justifiable (even self justifiable) land claims, why would they need the hassle. They would have all the influence they could want via a reinstated Assad.
Much simpler than taking troublesome land.
This space for Hire! Reasonable rates. Reach an audience of literally dozens!
I don't care for Miley myself, but that's ****ed up. Time to realize what Islam is, and there's nothing "peaceful" about it.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
This is conjecture as there are no reliable statistics of either how many people Hussein killed or how many have been killed since the invasion, and the estimates for both are all over the place and vary wildly based on who is reporting them.
Regardless, both numbers, whatever they actually are, are horrific. If the justification for war was lessening human suffering in a meaningful way, it was a colossal failure.
It's also almost probable that Iraq would have fallen during the Arab Spring, much like the Ba'ath party in Syria did (along with a number of other states in the region) before Russian intervention. I would make the argument that it's likely that we did, though this assertion isn't provable in a scientific way. Saddam had upwards of a half million people killed outside his invasion of Kuwait and several other conflicts, so the totality of the US involvement in the war from a sheer numbers perspective is roughly on par with that. It's unfortunate, for sure, but you cannot say without a doubt that our involvement was a "failure" in terms of lessening the suffering. Without our help, it's entirely possible that Iraw today would be wholly controlled by ISIS - it was only our intervention (after we pulled out) that prevented the total collapse of Iraq.
They nabbed Crimea just because they figured they could get away with it. Putin is empire building to fluff his ego.
I agree with you up until "to fluff his ego".
Putin is just getting started with his vision of restoring Russia's territorial control to post-WW2 soviet levels. His getting buddy-buddy with Iran, and his actions in Ukraine, Syria, and abroad (including a massive military build up) support that scenario.
Putin is just getting started with his vision of restoring Russia's territorial control to post-WW2 soviet levels. His getting buddy-buddy with Iran, and his actions in Ukraine, Syria, and abroad (including a massive military build up) support that scenario.
Yeah, but I think he's doing it all purely for bragging rights.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
When will morons on the Left stop with the false equivalence? Conservative Islam is, far and away, the greatest current threat to humanity, according to sheer body count. Regressive idiots like Kurt Eichenwald, writer of that shamefully inaccurate pile of sh*t you call an article, should be laughed out of their profession. Wake me up when an NRA member parades around Nashville carrying a little girl's head around as a trophy. The **** is wrong with you people?
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
When will morons on the Left stop with the false equivalence? Conservative Islam is, far and away, the greatest current threat to humanity, according to sheer body count. Regressive idiots like Kurt Eichenwald, writer of that shamefully inaccurate pile of sh*t you call an article, should be laughed out of their profession. Wake me up when an NRA member parades around Nashville carrying a little girl's head around as a trophy. The **** is wrong with you people?
The article said "bigger threat to AMERICA" quite clearly. You OTOH are talking about "sheer body count" globally. If you have an issue with the article then how about you attempt to offer up a point-by-point rebuttal of what it actually says instead of your typical straw-man dismissal?
The article said "bigger threat to AMERICA" quite clearly. You OTOH are talking about "sheer body count" globally. If you have an issue with the article then how about you attempt to offer up a point-by-point rebuttal of what it actually says instead of your typical straw-man dismissal?
The article said "bigger threat to AMERICA" quite clearly. You OTOH are talking about "sheer body count" globally. If you have an issue with the article then how about you attempt to offer up a point-by-point rebuttal of what it actually says instead of your typical straw-man dismissal?
It isn't worth a rebuttal, it's BS political tripe in an attempt to dismiss how dangerous Islam is in today's world. The post I made wasn't talking about America, why would he post some myopic op-ed about the US when I obviously was talking about the greatest international threat (conservative Islam)?
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
It isn't worth a rebuttal, it's BS political tripe in an attempt to dismiss how dangerous Islam is in today's world. The post I made wasn't talking about America, why would he post some myopic op-ed about the US when I obviously was talking about the greatest international threat (conservative Islam)?
Is this emotional for you because your militia might be considered right-wing, and possibly extremist?
I would think that >1000 beheadings /year (not counting people being stoned, thrown off buildings, or burned alive), of innocent people (including little children), would be an emotional issue for anyone. But no, a few agitated gun-toters are worse (at least in your hollow head).
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
Is this emotional for you because your militia might be considered right-wing, and possibly extremist?
It's emotional for me because my goddaughter was murdered by Islamic extremists, when they blew up her school bus. How many people in your family have been murdered by militia members? Is that why you're so emotional?
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
It isn't worth a rebuttal, it's BS political tripe in an attempt to dismiss how dangerous Islam is in today's world. The post I made wasn't talking about America, why would he post some myopic op-ed about the US when I obviously was talking about the greatest international threat (conservative Islam)?
The post you made was about some wack-job that cut the head off of a child. Naturally you think that and "1000+ beheadings" are somehow reflective of over 1 billion Muslims in the world. I'll leave you to wallow in such abject stupidity to your heart's content.
The post you made was about some wack-job that cut the head off of a child. Naturally you think that and "1000+ beheadings" are somehow reflective of over 1 billion Muslims in the world. I'll leave you to wallow in such abject stupidity to your heart's content.
The post you made was about some wack-job that cut the head off of a child. Naturally you think that and "1000+ beheadings" are somehow reflective of over 1 billion Muslims in the world. I'll leave you to wallow in such abject stupidity to your heart's content.
You don't have the faculties to attempt to point out anyone else's stupidity. Somehow you've turned what I've said about conservative Muslims to be representative of all of Islam (strawman). Typical.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
You don't have the faculties to attempt to point out anyone else's stupidity. Somehow you've turned what I've said about conservative Muslims to be representative of all of Islam (strawman). Typical.
Beheadings et al aren't even indicative of conservative Islam. Which is the point that seems to elude you. You are citing examples of "straight-up-off-the-deep-end-fringe-elements" and portraying them as being examples of "conservative" Muslims. That's akin to me citing Alex Jones as being typical of "conservative" Americans.
Beheadings et al aren't even indicative of conservative Islam. Which is the point that seems to elude you. You are citing examples of "straight-up-off-the-deep-end-fringe-elements" and portraying them as being examples of "conservative" Muslims. That's akin to me citing Alex Jones as being typical of "conservative" Americans.
Bullshit. The Saudis are prototypical conservative Muslims.
I would go into detail about the points that elude you, but there simply isn't enough time in the day.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
It's emotional for me because my goddaughter was murdered by Islamic extremists, when they blew up her school bus. How many people in your family have been murdered by militia members? Is that why you're so emotional?
I'm truly sorry about this, I obviously had no idea.
However, I must say that you seem to have (understandably) become prejudicial at best, hateful at worst of a massive population of people.
Right as we speak there are blacks killing whites, whites killing blacks, x killing y. You can rationalize these sort of thoughts with pseudo-academic arguments about ideology and human psychology, but at the end of the day humans are massively complex (look at all of the Donald Trump supporters as an example). There are exceptions to every rule, including Muslims that are non-violent and non-ideological, ideological and non-violent, violent, etc. Just about anybody is capable of anything.
Your arguments about how Islam can be very dangerous are fair and that is one thing, and I'm not suggesting we should just be passive about these horrendous acts, but to paint everybody with the same brush is not, and if you wanted to be touchy feely and peace loving hippy-like you could even say that when we do this they win, and this wouldn't be untrue.
Muslim extremists are shitty, nobody is disputing this, but the article I posted also points out that there are other extreme populations that can be super shitty too. As shitty? Does it matter? Shitty is shitty.
I wonder when we'll see gay marriage and legal abortions in Saudi Arabia. I'm thinking the first week after... never.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
]The radicals are estimated to be between 15 to 25% according to all intelligence services around the world.
... spoken confidently yet without any substantiation whatsoever was quite revelatory of her schtick. Because her fundamental position that this represents 180 - 300 million Muslims worldwide "dedicated to the destruction of Western civilization" is rooted in that particular premise ... be it false or otherwise. I'll simply make this observation. Who here really thinks it likely that "all intelligence services around the world" actually agree on the definition of an Islamic "terrorist" or "radical" ... let alone that Ms. Gabriel has access to all of their assessments? Even "Western" intelligence agencies can't even agree amongst themselves if Hezbollah should be considered a "terrorist organization". Not to mention that even non-western intelligence agencies who may have a very different of what constitutes an "Islamic radical". Does anyone seriously think that even the Jordanian, Saudi, and Egyptian intelligence agencies see it the same way?
I'm truly sorry about this, I obviously had no idea.
However, I must say that you seem to have (understandably) become prejudicial at best, hateful at worst of a massive population of people.
Indeed, there's no place in the Western world for conservative Islam.
Right as we speak there are blacks killing whites, whites killing blacks, x killing y. You can rationalize these sort of thoughts with pseudo-academic arguments about ideology and human psychology, but at the end of the day humans are massively complex (look at all of the Donald Trump supporters as an example). There are exceptions to every rule, including Muslims that are non-violent and non-ideological, ideological and non-violent, violent, etc. Just about anybody is capable of anything.
What happens in the USA trifles in comparison to what Islam is doing, with clerical endorsement, elsewhere in the world.
Your arguments about how Islam can be very dangerous are fair and that is one thing, and I'm not suggesting we should just be passive about these horrendous acts, but to paint everybody with the same brush is not, and if you wanted to be touchy feely and peace loving hippy-like you could even say that when we do this they win, and this wouldn't be untrue.
We need to hunt down and kill all radical Islamists, wherever they are, and serve notice to all conservative Muslims that their ideology and inhumane doctrine won't be tolerated outside their squalid countries.
Muslim extremists are shitty, nobody is disputing this, but the article I posted also points out that there are other extreme populations that can be super shitty too. As shitty? Does it matter? Shitty is shitty.
The magnitude of the shitty isn't even comparable.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
I would go into detail about the points that elude you, but there simply isn't enough time in the day.
Those articles are talking about state executions as a government policy in a dictatorship. Yet you are still ascribing that to individual religious belief. Does it even occur to you that many "conservative Muslims" in Saudi Arabia actually oppose the House of Saud monarchy? Or are you so inclined to lump all Muslims into the same category that you can't even make basic insights like this?
Those articles are talking about state executions as a government policy in a dictatorship. Yet you are still ascribing that to individual religious belief. Does it even occur to you that many "conservative Muslims" in Saudi Arabia actually oppose the House of Saud monarchy? Or are you so inclined to lump all Muslims into the same category that you can't even make basic insights like this?
That's convenient, since all murders under Sharia Law are de facto "state executions", in the Muslim world. Are you even trying?
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
Allow me to break out the stick figures for you. If you are so uninformed that you don't realize that there are "conservative Muslims" in Saudi Arabia who are opposed to the rule of the House of Saud then clearly you are the one who isn't even trying.
OAW
PS: A Wordpress blog? Really?
Unfortunately, we only have the original article discussing the poll results (screen caps below) which was published in Al-Hayat news in Saudi Arabia on July 22, 2014, and that confirm a 92% outcome of support for the Islamic State, but no details or example of all the questions, sources and responses to the poll itself.
Allow me to break out the stick figures for you. If you are so uninformed that you don't realize that there are "conservative Muslims" in Saudi Arabia who are opposed to the rule of the House of Saud then clearly you are the one who isn't even trying.
All 8% of them? Not surprising though, since just about all the "liberal" Muslims there have been killed.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr